OrthodoxChristianity.net

Moderated Forums => Free-For-All => Religious Topics => Topic started by: podkarpatska on March 11, 2013, 04:23:09 PM

Title: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: podkarpatska on March 11, 2013, 04:23:09 PM
With the papal election this week, I thought a discussion on the general topic based on news reports might be of interest. Not Orthodox/Catholic discussion, just the news aspect.

Here is an interesting quote on the conclave process from a Georgetown U. Church history professor:

"The conclave is a process that dates to the Middle Ages. Until the 11th century, the process of picking popes was “a mess and inconsistent,” said Georgetown University history professor the Rev. David Collins. The popes were picked by various combinations of the clergy in Rome and the generation population. At that time, popes served as the head of Christianity in Western Europe and as the bishop of Rome. The city was governed by several prominent families, and the pope would come from one of those families."  http://m.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/papal-conclave-has-tight-structure-uncertain-length/2013/03/11/044128a4-8a5c-11e2-8d72-dc76641cb8d4_story.html


Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: genesisone on March 11, 2013, 04:33:27 PM
There was an interesting and IMO very sensible column carried in many Canadian papers today. The writer, Michael Coren, shows the differences between what the media are saying and what life is actually like in RC parishes.

http://www.torontosun.com/2013/03/08/church-not-in-a-state-most-canadian-journalists-comments-on-roman-catholic-church-are-off-the-mark (http://www.torontosun.com/2013/03/08/church-not-in-a-state-most-canadian-journalists-comments-on-roman-catholic-church-are-off-the-mark)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 11, 2013, 04:51:40 PM
With the papal election this week, I thought a discussion on the general topic based on news reports might be of interest. Not Orthodox/Catholic discussion, just the news aspect.

Here is an interesting quote on the conclave process from a Georgetown U. Church history professor:

"The conclave is a process that dates to the Middle Ages. Until the 11th century, the process of picking popes was “a mess and inconsistent,” said Georgetown University history professor the Rev. David Collins. The popes were picked by various combinations of the clergy in Rome and the generation population. At that time, popes served as the head of Christianity in Western Europe and as the bishop of Rome. The city was governed by several prominent families, and the pope would come from one of those families."  http://m.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/papal-conclave-has-tight-structure-uncertain-length/2013/03/11/044128a4-8a5c-11e2-8d72-dc76641cb8d4_story.html


Not many RCs would admit to this ;)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 11, 2013, 06:13:59 PM
With the papal election this week, I thought a discussion on the general topic based on news reports might be of interest. Not Orthodox/Catholic discussion, just the news aspect.

Here is an interesting quote on the conclave process from a Georgetown U. Church history professor:

"The conclave is a process that dates to the Middle Ages. Until the 11th century, the process of picking popes was “a mess and inconsistent,” said Georgetown University history professor the Rev. David Collins. The popes were picked by various combinations of the clergy in Rome and the generation population. At that time, popes served as the head of Christianity in Western Europe and as the bishop of Rome. The city was governed by several prominent families, and the pope would come from one of those families."  http://m.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/papal-conclave-has-tight-structure-uncertain-length/2013/03/11/044128a4-8a5c-11e2-8d72-dc76641cb8d4_story.html


Not many RCs would admit to this ;)
Are you sure of that?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Deacon Lance on March 11, 2013, 06:18:47 PM
With the papal election this week, I thought a discussion on the general topic based on news reports might be of interest. Not Orthodox/Catholic discussion, just the news aspect.

Here is an interesting quote on the conclave process from a Georgetown U. Church history professor:

"The conclave is a process that dates to the Middle Ages. Until the 11th century, the process of picking popes was “a mess and inconsistent,” said Georgetown University history professor the Rev. David Collins. The popes were picked by various combinations of the clergy in Rome and the generation population. At that time, popes served as the head of Christianity in Western Europe and as the bishop of Rome. The city was governed by several prominent families, and the pope would come from one of those families."  http://m.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/papal-conclave-has-tight-structure-uncertain-length/2013/03/11/044128a4-8a5c-11e2-8d72-dc76641cb8d4_story.html


Not many RCs would admit to this ;)

Rather they are ignorant of this. 
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 11, 2013, 06:42:10 PM
With the papal election this week, I thought a discussion on the general topic based on news reports might be of interest. Not Orthodox/Catholic discussion, just the news aspect.

Here is an interesting quote on the conclave process from a Georgetown U. Church history professor:

"The conclave is a process that dates to the Middle Ages. Until the 11th century, the process of picking popes was “a mess and inconsistent,” said Georgetown University history professor the Rev. David Collins. The popes were picked by various combinations of the clergy in Rome and the generation population. At that time, popes served as the head of Christianity in Western Europe and as the bishop of Rome. The city was governed by several prominent families, and the pope would come from one of those families."  http://m.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/papal-conclave-has-tight-structure-uncertain-length/2013/03/11/044128a4-8a5c-11e2-8d72-dc76641cb8d4_story.html


Not many RCs would admit to this ;)

Rather they are ignorant of this. 
Yes, I dare say most people-whether in the Vatican's flock or outside it-don't know that the present system isn't even a thousand years old.  Though, mystique and all, the Vatican isn't troubled by this misconception, but it will readily admit to this.

If they elect a non-Italian, the Italian monopoly is pretty much over.  And all the names I've been seeing are non-Italians.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: podkarpatska on March 11, 2013, 06:55:02 PM
With the papal election this week, I thought a discussion on the general topic based on news reports might be of interest. Not Orthodox/Catholic discussion, just the news aspect.

Here is an interesting quote on the conclave process from a Georgetown U. Church history professor:

"The conclave is a process that dates to the Middle Ages. Until the 11th century, the process of picking popes was “a mess and inconsistent,” said Georgetown University history professor the Rev. David Collins. The popes were picked by various combinations of the clergy in Rome and the generation population. At that time, popes served as the head of Christianity in Western Europe and as the bishop of Rome. The city was governed by several prominent families, and the pope would come from one of those families."  http://m.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/papal-conclave-has-tight-structure-uncertain-length/2013/03/11/044128a4-8a5c-11e2-8d72-dc76641cb8d4_story.html


Not many RCs would admit to this ;)

Rather they are ignorant of this. 
Yes, I dare say most people-whether in the Vatican's flock or outside it-don't know that the present system isn't even a thousand years old.  Though, mystique and all, the Vatican isn't troubled by this misconception, but it will readily admit to this.

If they elect a non-Italian, the Italian monopoly is pretty much over.  And all the names I've been seeing are non-Italians.

In fairness to our Roman brothers and sisters, it is not as if the methodologies used to select the Patriarchs  of the Eastern Empire in Constantinople were a paradigm of fairness or consistency.  ;)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 11, 2013, 07:12:04 PM
With the papal election this week, I thought a discussion on the general topic based on news reports might be of interest. Not Orthodox/Catholic discussion, just the news aspect.

Here is an interesting quote on the conclave process from a Georgetown U. Church history professor:

"The conclave is a process that dates to the Middle Ages. Until the 11th century, the process of picking popes was “a mess and inconsistent,” said Georgetown University history professor the Rev. David Collins. The popes were picked by various combinations of the clergy in Rome and the generation population. At that time, popes served as the head of Christianity in Western Europe and as the bishop of Rome. The city was governed by several prominent families, and the pope would come from one of those families."  http://m.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/papal-conclave-has-tight-structure-uncertain-length/2013/03/11/044128a4-8a5c-11e2-8d72-dc76641cb8d4_story.html


Not many RCs would admit to this ;)

Rather they are ignorant of this. 
Yes, I dare say most people-whether in the Vatican's flock or outside it-don't know that the present system isn't even a thousand years old.  Though, mystique and all, the Vatican isn't troubled by this misconception, but it will readily admit to this.

If they elect a non-Italian, the Italian monopoly is pretty much over.  And all the names I've been seeing are non-Italians.

In fairness to our Roman brothers and sisters, it is not as if the methodologies used to select the Patriarchs  of the Eastern Empire in Constantinople were a paradigm of fairness or consistency.  ;)
But to be fair, we don't have the fanfare either.  We've had a slew of new elections, and how much attention did people pay to it. I mean here the Orthodox, even in the Church concerned.

I make no comment (at least not here) on how fair or consistent the Vatican's rules are.  They are what they are.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Deacon Lance on March 11, 2013, 09:15:40 PM
No Orthodox Patriarch is spiritual father of 1 billion +.  If the Pope had the flock of a single nation or a few million souls I doubt there would be much fanfare.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Deacon Lance on March 11, 2013, 09:17:56 PM
If they elect a non-Italian, the Italian monopoly is pretty much over.  And all the names I've been seeing are non-Italians.

I have the feeling no Italian will be elected for a very long time.  They are seen as part of the problem.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 11, 2013, 09:19:01 PM
What are the chances that African Cardinal Peter Turkson will be elected?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: LBK on March 11, 2013, 09:56:02 PM
No Orthodox Patriarch is spiritual father of 1 billion +.  If the Pope had the flock of a single nation or a few million souls I doubt there would be much fanfare.

Irrelevant. Orthodoxy isn't about being popular or mighty. It's about defending and proclaiming the truth.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: podkarpatska on March 11, 2013, 10:01:44 PM
"Letting Go WHY BENEDICT'S RESIGNATION MATTERS"  an article by Orthodox priest, Fr.John Harvey in Commonweal magazine.

"The humility of his decision to give up power is, and this really does matter. It will affect future papacies, all to the good. There is something of kenosis in giving up any power you could hold on to, and God bless Benedict for doing this. I hope it spells the beginning of a rethinking of the nature of papal power. Lord Acton went to Rome during the First Vatican Council to lobby against the idea of papal infallibility, and his oft-quoted line “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely” was a reference to the papacy. I believe Benedict’s resignation was a genuinely selfless act, done for the good of all."  http://www.commonwealmagazine.org/letting-go
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 11, 2013, 10:06:43 PM
No Orthodox Patriarch is spiritual father of 1 billion +.  If the Pope had the flock of a single nation or a few million souls I doubt there would be much fanfare.

Irrelevant. Orthodoxy isn't about being popular or mighty. It's about defending and proclaiming the truth.

Amen.

Would that the Vatican would elect a truly "Orthodox" pope who would proclaim the truth as Christ taught the Apostles!

However, I am not holding my breath as things have actually changed for the worse since 1054 A.D. with the proclamation of Papal Infallibility and Supremacy at Vatican I in 1870. It would take a miracle to overcome this stumbling block.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: podkarpatska on March 11, 2013, 10:22:32 PM
No Orthodox Patriarch is spiritual father of 1 billion +.  If the Pope had the flock of a single nation or a few million souls I doubt there would be much fanfare.

Irrelevant. Orthodoxy isn't about being popular or mighty. It's about defending and proclaiming the truth.

Come on kids, cut it out. My point was simple. Patriarchal selection and deposition has historically been as flawed as that of the Roman popes. For example, look up Emperor Romanus I and his choice of his fourth son, 16 year old Theophylact, for the Patriarchal throne to succeed the aged once deposed and  twice enthroned Nicholas Mysticus. Poor Theophylact was castrated first so that he would not be unduly distracted from his churchly duties - something that perhaps should have been considered for Alexander Sixtus by the Curia.

This isn't a criticism of the current Patriarch, but come on, as an example, the current Patriarch of the "Third Rome" certainly projects a sense of power, fancy vestiture and media savvy as well as any Pope could hope for.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: LBK on March 11, 2013, 10:33:32 PM
No Orthodox Patriarch is spiritual father of 1 billion +.  If the Pope had the flock of a single nation or a few million souls I doubt there would be much fanfare.

Irrelevant. Orthodoxy isn't about being popular or mighty. It's about defending and proclaiming the truth.

Come on kids, cut it out. My point was simple. Patriarchal selection and deposition has historically been as flawed as that of the Roman popes. For example, look up Emperor Romanus I and his choice of his fourth son, 16 year old Theophylact, for the Patriarchal throne to succeed the aged once deposed and  twice enthroned Nicholas Mysticus. Poor Theophylact was castrated first so that he would not be unduly distracted from his churchly duties - something that perhaps should have been considered for Alexander Sixtus by the Curia.

This isn't a criticism of the current Patriarch, but come on, as an example, the current Patriarch of the "Third Rome" certainly projects a sense of power, fancy vestiture and media savvy as well as any Pope could hope for.


My dear Podkarpatska, I was merely responding to Deacon Lance's rather boastful post, which equates numbers with a church's importance.  :)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: davinpa on March 11, 2013, 11:23:57 PM
I think the point of Deacon Lance is that the Pope is viewed differently by his flock from the way an orthodox Patriarch is viewed by his own flock.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: davinpa on March 11, 2013, 11:26:36 PM
As boastful as it is, in the secular world, number DOES equate importance.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 11, 2013, 11:34:44 PM
With the papal election this week, I thought a discussion on the general topic based on news reports might be of interest. Not Orthodox/Catholic discussion, just the news aspect.

Here is an interesting quote on the conclave process from a Georgetown U. Church history professor:

"The conclave is a process that dates to the Middle Ages. Until the 11th century, the process of picking popes was “a mess and inconsistent,” said Georgetown University history professor the Rev. David Collins. The popes were picked by various combinations of the clergy in Rome and the generation population. At that time, popes served as the head of Christianity in Western Europe and as the bishop of Rome. The city was governed by several prominent families, and the pope would come from one of those families."  http://m.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/papal-conclave-has-tight-structure-uncertain-length/2013/03/11/044128a4-8a5c-11e2-8d72-dc76641cb8d4_story.html


Not many RCs would admit to this ;)
Are you sure of that?

Yes.  At least those who are the "internet apologist" types.  They seem to always want to paint a rosy picture of Church history where the Roman Catholics never do anything wrong, everything is organized, you know, the sun is always shining at the Vatican.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 11, 2013, 11:38:33 PM
No Orthodox Patriarch is spiritual father of 1 billion +.  If the Pope had the flock of a single nation or a few million souls I doubt there would be much fanfare.

Irrelevant. Orthodoxy isn't about being popular or mighty. It's about defending and proclaiming the truth.

Come on kids, cut it out. My point was simple. Patriarchal selection and deposition has historically been as flawed as that of the Roman popes. For example, look up Emperor Romanus I and his choice of his fourth son, 16 year old Theophylact, for the Patriarchal throne to succeed the aged once deposed and  twice enthroned Nicholas Mysticus. Poor Theophylact was castrated first so that he would not be unduly distracted from his churchly duties - something that perhaps should have been considered for Alexander Sixtus by the Curia.

This isn't a criticism of the current Patriarch, but come on, as an example, the current Patriarch of the "Third Rome" certainly projects a sense of power, fancy vestiture and media savvy as well as any Pope could hope for.


Perhaps all the RC unmarried deacons, priests, bishops, and cardinals should have been castrated so they would not be "distracted from" their "churchly duties."









 ::)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 11, 2013, 11:40:38 PM
With the papal election this week, I thought a discussion on the general topic based on news reports might be of interest. Not Orthodox/Catholic discussion, just the news aspect.

Here is an interesting quote on the conclave process from a Georgetown U. Church history professor:

"The conclave is a process that dates to the Middle Ages. Until the 11th century, the process of picking popes was “a mess and inconsistent,” said Georgetown University history professor the Rev. David Collins. The popes were picked by various combinations of the clergy in Rome and the generation population. At that time, popes served as the head of Christianity in Western Europe and as the bishop of Rome. The city was governed by several prominent families, and the pope would come from one of those families."  http://m.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/papal-conclave-has-tight-structure-uncertain-length/2013/03/11/044128a4-8a5c-11e2-8d72-dc76641cb8d4_story.html


Not many RCs would admit to this ;)
Are you sure of that?

Yes.  At least those who are the "internet apologist" types.  They seem to always want to paint a rosy picture of Church history where the Roman Catholics never do anything wrong, everything is organized, you know, the sun is always shining at the Vatican.

And when the lightning strikes at Vatican I and at Pope Benedict XVI's resignation, that lightning was a sign of Divine Approbation.   :o   ::)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: LBK on March 11, 2013, 11:41:12 PM
As boastful as it is, in the secular world, number DOES equate importance.

We are called to be in the world, but not of this world. Therefore, we should not be concerned with what the secular world thinks about this matter. :angel:
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Nephi on March 11, 2013, 11:46:58 PM
My dear Podkarpatska, I was merely responding to Deacon Lance's rather boastful post, which equates numbers with a church's importance.  :)

It didn't come across as boasting to me, nor equating numbers with importance, since he was only talking about fanfare. I'd be inclined to think there might be more fanfare (not that it's really that important) around an Orthodox Patriarch's election if he were the pastor of a billion individuals around the world.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: TheMathematician on March 12, 2013, 12:23:19 AM
As boastful as it is, in the secular world, number DOES equate importance.

We are called to be in the world, but not of this world. Therefore, we should not be concerned with what the secular world thinks about this matter. :angel:

While you are right, of course, the point of, or least how I read it, of Deacon Lances point is exactly iChat,the secular importance and fanfare, and we don't have that because our church isn't as big numerically.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Basil 320 on March 12, 2013, 01:16:10 AM
Mark Steyn, substituting for Rush Limbaugh today, predicted Cardinal Marc Ouellet, former Archbishop of Quebec, current head of the Congregation of Bishops, will be the next pope.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 12, 2013, 01:32:34 AM
Mark Steyn, substituting for Rush Limbaugh today, predicted Cardinal Marc Ouellet, former Archbishop of Quebec, current head of the Congregation of Bishops, will be the next pope.

GO CANADA!!!


Wait, he's Quebecois.

Boooooo!!! :p
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 12, 2013, 03:10:07 AM
If they elect a non-Italian, the Italian monopoly is pretty much over.  And all the names I've been seeing are non-Italians.

I have the feeling no Italian will be elected for a very long time.  They are seen as part of the problem.
I'm rooting for Cardinal Scola. I think he would continue Pope Benedict's reform of the reform.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 12, 2013, 03:10:07 AM
No Orthodox Patriarch is spiritual father of 1 billion +.  If the Pope had the flock of a single nation or a few million souls I doubt there would be much fanfare.
Don't know about that. I expect that the selection of the next Dalai Lama will be a media event.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 12, 2013, 03:10:07 AM
As boastful as it is, in the secular world, number DOES equate importance.

We are called to be in the world, but not of this world. Therefore, we should not be concerned with what the secular world thinks about this matter. :angel:

While you are right, of course, the point of, or least how I read it, of Deacon Lances point is exactly iChat,the secular importance and fanfare, and we don't have that because our church isn't as big numerically.
Not dependent on the numbers: the coronation of the next British monarch will get a lot of fan fare, although it will be a constitutional monarch of less than a hundred million, largely because we also speak English.  I doubt that the conclave is as big news in Greece as it is here.

Fact is, other than the enthronement, or consecration, there isn't a lot of ceremony with the succession of the Orthodox Patriarchs, nor has there ever been.  Even when we outnumbered the Vatican's flock.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 12, 2013, 03:10:07 AM
Mark Steyn, substituting for Rush Limbaugh today, predicted Cardinal Marc Ouellet, former Archbishop of Quebec, current head of the Congregation of Bishops, will be the next pope.
He's Anglican though. Steyn that is.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Monk Vasyl on March 12, 2013, 08:24:30 AM
If they elect a non-Italian, the Italian monopoly is pretty much over.  And all the names I've been seeing are non-Italians.

I have the feeling no Italian will be elected for a very long time.  They are seen as part of the problem.
I'm rooting for Cardinal Scola. I think he would continue Pope Benedict's reform of the reform.

They need someone who can reform the Curia.  It sometimes seems that the Curia really is the one running the Catholic church.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: John Larocque on March 12, 2013, 08:44:13 AM
It is odd to assert - except perhaps to Orthodox ears - that the modern papacy is only 1,000 years old. The system was set in place by Pope Gregory VII, picking up where Cardinal Humbert left off. Rome denied that civilian leaders should have any say in who leads the church, from local bishops (the lay investiture controversy / simony) all the way to the pope himself.

Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: podkarpatska on March 12, 2013, 08:52:08 AM
Sigh. My point was not related to size, media attention or who "does it better." Rather I thought it might remind us that neither Church has a claim to an unblemished past which should remind us that humility and introspection are to be preferred over idle boasts. Too much to hope for online?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Adela on March 12, 2013, 09:38:43 AM

They need someone who can reform the Curia.  It sometimes seems that the Curia really is the one running the Catholic church.

Or maybe it's also run by some nuns who know how to get things done.  Like this one:
http://pulitzercenter.org/reporting/vatican-jason-berry-mother-tekla-most-powerful-woman-in-rome

Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) on March 12, 2013, 10:13:21 AM
No Orthodox Patriarch is spiritual father of 1 billion +.  If the Pope had the flock of a single nation or a few million souls I doubt there would be much fanfare.

Irrelevant. Orthodoxy isn't about being popular or mighty. It's about defending and proclaiming the truth.

I agree with others that Deacon Lance's observation was spot on regarding the media attention.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 12, 2013, 10:59:22 AM
Mark Steyn, substituting for Rush Limbaugh today, predicted Cardinal Marc Ouellet, former Archbishop of Quebec, current head of the Congregation of Bishops, will be the next pope.
He's Anglican though. Steyn that is.

So what?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 12, 2013, 11:02:46 AM
It is odd to assert - except perhaps to Orthodox ears - that the modern papacy is only 1,000 years old. The system was set in place by Pope Gregory VII, picking up where Cardinal Humbert left off. Rome denied that civilian leaders should have any say in who leads the church, from local bishops (the lay investiture controversy / simony) all the way to the pope himself.
Yes, it was 1017-1274 when the Vatican's papacy was codified into more or less what we know today.  Not a lot of time when you think of it. The Sistine Chapel has been fixed as the site of conclave only since 1846.  Secular veto/confirmation was done away with only in 1904.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 12, 2013, 11:04:52 AM
No Orthodox Patriarch is spiritual father of 1 billion +.  If the Pope had the flock of a single nation or a few million souls I doubt there would be much fanfare.

Irrelevant. Orthodoxy isn't about being popular or mighty. It's about defending and proclaiming the truth.

Come on kids, cut it out. My point was simple. Patriarchal selection and deposition has historically been as flawed as that of the Roman popes. For example, look up Emperor Romanus I and his choice of his fourth son, 16 year old Theophylact, for the Patriarchal throne to succeed the aged once deposed and  twice enthroned Nicholas Mysticus. Poor Theophylact was castrated first so that he would not be unduly distracted from his churchly duties - something that perhaps should have been considered for Alexander Sixtus by the Curia.

This isn't a criticism of the current Patriarch, but come on, as an example, the current Patriarch of the "Third Rome" certainly projects a sense of power, fancy vestiture and media savvy as well as any Pope could hope for.


Perhaps all the RC unmarried deacons, priests, bishops, and cardinals should have been castrated so they would not be "distracted from" their "churchly duties."









 ::)

Really??  Not quite sure how to interpret the rolling eyes emoticon--are you joking in what you say, or are you serious?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 12, 2013, 11:36:15 AM
Mark Steyn, substituting for Rush Limbaugh today, predicted Cardinal Marc Ouellet, former Archbishop of Quebec, current head of the Congregation of Bishops, will be the next pope.
He's Anglican though. Steyn that is.

So what?
So I doubt he has any particular insight, given that he rejected his Vatican baptism by confirming it in the Anglican ecclesial community.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: John Larocque on March 12, 2013, 12:00:21 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investiture_Controversy

Quote
The crisis began when a group within the church, members of the Gregorian Reform, decided to rebel against the rule of simony by forcefully taking the power of investiture from the ruling secular power, i.e. the Holy Roman Emperor and placing that power wholly within control of the Church. The Gregorian reformers knew this would not be possible so long as the emperor maintained the ability to appoint the pope, so their first step was to forcibly gain the papacy from the control of the emperor.

This is what happened in the Latin West after it wrested itself free from the era of the Byzantine Papacy, where the Roman Emperor nominated the popes for several centuries. Pope Martin the Confessor was one of the few popes crowned without Imperial consent. The Byzantine Papacy began after Justinian deposed Silverius, the son of Pope Hormisdas. The Holy Roman Empire, created in part by Rome, more or less assumed the same role as the Byzantine Emperors.

http://orthodoxengland.org.uk/ortpopes.htm

Quote
St. Hormisdas (+ 523), from Italy and father of St. Silverius (see below), he helped end the monophysite schism. Feast: 6 August.

Quote
St. Silverius (+ 537), he was exiled to Asia Minor as a result of political intrigues. He later died in exile from starvation and various hardships and injustices. He was venerated as a martyr for Orthodoxy. He was succeeded by five popes who are not saints. Feast: 20 June.

Silverius was actually still alive when the emperor installed Pope Vigilius. Curiously, Silverius never shows up on lists of popes who have abdicated, nor does Vigilius show up on lists of lists of anti-popes, despite the overlap between the two reigns.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 12, 2013, 12:09:42 PM
Mark Steyn, substituting for Rush Limbaugh today, predicted Cardinal Marc Ouellet, former Archbishop of Quebec, current head of the Congregation of Bishops, will be the next pope.
He's Anglican though. Steyn that is.

So what?
So I doubt he has any particular insight, given that he rejected his Vatican baptism by confirming it in the Anglican ecclesial community.

Okay, so you doubt it.  You do not, however, know it, and neither do I.  *Anybody* can make any kind of prediction they like, with or without "particular insight".  What ecclesial community one belongs to doesn't, in and of itself, limit or delimit the amount of insight one has about this matter.  How much or how little insight any given person has about this issue will *only* be shown when the new Pope is elected and we find out who he is.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Benjamin the Red on March 12, 2013, 12:14:21 PM
If you're looking for some decent video coverage of the Conclave, EWTN has a live stream (http://www.ewtn.com/multimedia/live_player.asp).
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 12, 2013, 12:26:22 PM
If you're looking for some decent video coverage of the Conclave, EWTN has a live stream (http://www.ewtn.com/multimedia/live_player.asp).

Thanks!
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 12, 2013, 12:46:28 PM
With the papal election this week, I thought a discussion on the general topic based on news reports might be of interest. Not Orthodox/Catholic discussion, just the news aspect.

Here is an interesting quote on the conclave process from a Georgetown U. Church history professor:

"The conclave is a process that dates to the Middle Ages. Until the 11th century, the process of picking popes was “a mess and inconsistent,” said Georgetown University history professor the Rev. David Collins. The popes were picked by various combinations of the clergy in Rome and the generation population. At that time, popes served as the head of Christianity in Western Europe and as the bishop of Rome. The city was governed by several prominent families, and the pope would come from one of those families."  http://m.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/papal-conclave-has-tight-structure-uncertain-length/2013/03/11/044128a4-8a5c-11e2-8d72-dc76641cb8d4_story.html


Not many RCs would admit to this ;)
Are you sure of that?

Yes.  At least those who are the "internet apologist" types.  They seem to always want to paint a rosy picture of Church history where the Roman Catholics never do anything wrong, everything is organized, you know, the sun is always shining at the Vatican.
I've never met these people. Most Catholics I know realize full-well that Church has some dark chapters in her history. We are going though such a chapter now with the sex abuse crisis.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 12, 2013, 01:27:47 PM
With the papal election this week, I thought a discussion on the general topic based on news reports might be of interest. Not Orthodox/Catholic discussion, just the news aspect.

Here is an interesting quote on the conclave process from a Georgetown U. Church history professor:

"The conclave is a process that dates to the Middle Ages. Until the 11th century, the process of picking popes was “a mess and inconsistent,” said Georgetown University history professor the Rev. David Collins. The popes were picked by various combinations of the clergy in Rome and the generation population. At that time, popes served as the head of Christianity in Western Europe and as the bishop of Rome. The city was governed by several prominent families, and the pope would come from one of those families."  http://m.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/papal-conclave-has-tight-structure-uncertain-length/2013/03/11/044128a4-8a5c-11e2-8d72-dc76641cb8d4_story.html


Not many RCs would admit to this ;)
Are you sure of that?

Yes.  At least those who are the "internet apologist" types.  They seem to always want to paint a rosy picture of Church history where the Roman Catholics never do anything wrong, everything is organized, you know, the sun is always shining at the Vatican.
I've never met these people. Most Catholics I know realize full-well that Church has some dark chapters in her history. We are going though such a chapter now with the sex abuse crisis.

I have to say that I haven't met these people either.  I have met, however, a number of people, on the internet and in person, who love nothing more than to criticize, degrade, and belittle the Catholic Church, seeing no good in her whatsoever, always ready to jump on the slightest fault or perceived fault.  For some it seems almost a raison d'etre.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 12, 2013, 01:29:45 PM
I've never met these people. Most Catholics I know realize full-well that Church has some dark chapters in her history. We are going though such a chapter now with the sex abuse crisis.

Where do you live?  I need to move there.

There's one of these internet apologist types who friended me on Facebook upon learning that I "apostatized" and is debating me about the Papacy.  Everything I throw at him he always has some poor sorry excuse as to why the Pope or the Roman Church didn't really do anything wrong.  Typical par for the course history re-engineering by some apologists.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 12, 2013, 01:39:45 PM
I've never met these people. Most Catholics I know realize full-well that Church has some dark chapters in her history. We are going though such a chapter now with the sex abuse crisis.

Where do you live?  I need to move there.

There's one of these internet apologist types who friended me on Facebook upon learning that I "apostatized" and is debating me about the Papacy.  Everything I throw at him he always has some poor sorry excuse as to why the Pope or the Roman Church didn't really do anything wrong.  Typical par for the course history re-engineering by some apologists.

FaceBook?  Guess that 'splains it  ;D ;D.  (You couldn't pay me enough to open a FaceBook account, let alone use it  8).)

Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 12, 2013, 02:19:59 PM
I've never met these people. Most Catholics I know realize full-well that Church has some dark chapters in her history. We are going though such a chapter now with the sex abuse crisis.

Where do you live?  I need to move there.

There's one of these internet apologist types who friended me on Facebook upon learning that I "apostatized" and is debating me about the Papacy.  Everything I throw at him he always has some poor sorry excuse as to why the Pope or the Roman Church didn't really do anything wrong.  Typical par for the course history re-engineering by some apologists.

FaceBook?  Guess that 'splains it  ;D ;D.  (You couldn't pay me enough to open a FaceBook account, let alone use it  8).)



Well, I kept in touch with some Catholic groups back home (in the Philippines).  I've already left those groups when I converted to Orthodoxy but I maintained some personal connections to a few people who have really become friends with me.  I guess this guy caught a whiff of my conversion and thinks it is his duty to convince me of the Truth of the Catholic Church and win me back.  He thinks I'm annoyed at him because all the quotes of the Fathers he keeps sending me is true and are offending my beliefs.  I'm really just annoyed at him because he is annoying.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 12, 2013, 02:21:55 PM
Anyway, back to the conclave.

I think the world media attention here is just akin to Will and Kate's wedding.  The facination on the British Royals doesn't mean everyone wants to be under the Queen.  The facination on the conclave doesn't mean people are willing to understand Catholicism, much less convert to it.  Same facinataion with US elections around the world.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 12, 2013, 02:23:42 PM
I've never met these people. Most Catholics I know realize full-well that Church has some dark chapters in her history. We are going though such a chapter now with the sex abuse crisis.

Where do you live?  I need to move there.

There's one of these internet apologist types who friended me on Facebook upon learning that I "apostatized" and is debating me about the Papacy.  Everything I throw at him he always has some poor sorry excuse as to why the Pope or the Roman Church didn't really do anything wrong.  Typical par for the course history re-engineering by some apologists.

One of the apologists from Catholic Answers got in contact with me as soon as I became a catechumen.
I told my Orthodox Priest and he sent the guy a letter telling him to stop harassing me. The apologist and author apologized and went away.

News media are gathering to view the expected black smoke any moment now.
Cardinal Dolan of New York said that he expects that the conclave will elect a pope by this Thursday night (9 voting sessions).
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: podkarpatska on March 12, 2013, 02:39:07 PM
Very BLACK smoke per CNN.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 12, 2013, 02:40:35 PM
Very BLACK smoke per CNN.

African Pope?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Adela on March 12, 2013, 02:42:53 PM
Interesting article by George Weigel about the conclave microculture:

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/342726/unique-conclave-microculture-george-weigel
Quote

The conclave of 2013 has its own unique framework, within which those unexpected intra-conclave dynamics will emerge and play themselves out. It’s not the old post–Vatican II progressive vs. conservative division; one of the most striking things about this conclave is that there is no progressive candidate, as there was in 2005. No, the framework-setting issue for this conclave is different: It’s the division between Old Church and New Church, between institutional-maintenance Catholicism and Evangelical Catholicism. And along that fault line there are two different approaches to what is indisputably a major issue as the conclave is enclosed: the reform of the Roman Curia.

Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 12, 2013, 02:44:39 PM
Very BLACK smoke per CNN.

African Pope?

Oy.  Vey.  ::)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 12, 2013, 02:45:04 PM
They do need to reform the Curia and get rid of that abomination known as the Congregataion of the Oriental Churches.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 12, 2013, 02:49:13 PM
They do need to reform the Curia and get rid of that abomination known as the Congregataion of the Oriental Churches.

Because you say so?  8)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 12, 2013, 03:12:17 PM
Black smoke.

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/12/17276360-black-smoke-rises-from-sistine-chapel-no-decision-on-pope?lite
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 12, 2013, 03:14:40 PM
They do need to reform the Curia and get rid of that abomination known as the Congregataion of the Oriental Churches.

Because you say so?  8)

Yes  8)

I mean, c'mon, Eastern Catholic Churches are supposed to be "sui juris", and yet you have a Papal office to "juris" them?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Monk Vasyl on March 12, 2013, 03:16:45 PM
They do need to reform the Curia and get rid of that abomination known as the Congregataion of the Oriental Churches.

When I was still a Franciscan and contemplating switching Rites, I knew a Ruthenian Rite priest who referred to the Congregation of the Oriental Churches as the Vatican's version of the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 12, 2013, 03:21:19 PM
They do need to reform the Curia and get rid of that abomination known as the Congregataion of the Oriental Churches.

When I was still a Franciscan and contemplating switching Rites, I knew a Ruthenian Rite priest who referred to the Congregation of the Oriental Churches as the Vatican's version of the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

It would be better if the Vatican just creates a standing synod of Eastern Church Primates and let them figure it out themselves.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 12, 2013, 03:23:30 PM
They do need to reform the Curia and get rid of that abomination known as the Congregataion of the Oriental Churches.

When I was still a Franciscan and contemplating switching Rites, I knew a Ruthenian Rite priest who referred to the Congregation of the Oriental Churches as the Vatican's version of the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

Well, we Ruthenians are a pretty wild bunch  ;).

Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 12, 2013, 03:25:49 PM
They do need to reform the Curia and get rid of that abomination known as the Congregataion of the Oriental Churches.

When I was still a Franciscan and contemplating switching Rites, I knew a Ruthenian Rite priest who referred to the Congregation of the Oriental Churches as the Vatican's version of the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

It would be better if the Vatican just creates a standing synod of Eastern Church Primates and let them figure it out themselves.

That's not a bad idea.  Now, where's that suggestion box??  ;)

Choy for Pope!!  ;D  Uh oh...wait a minute...

Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 12, 2013, 03:32:38 PM
That's not a bad idea.  Now, where's that suggestion box??  ;)

Choy for Pope!!  ;D  Uh oh...wait a minute...

Hey, I still have Catholic baptismal records ;)

Ooohhh, if that were to happen I don't know what I'll do first.  Abolish the Tridentine Mass and replace it with the Divine Liturgy?  Reinstate infant Communion and Confirmation?  I KNOW!  Anathemize the SSPX!  :D :D :D

I'll keep Pastor Aeternus until I'm done 'doxing Rome ;)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: TheMathematician on March 12, 2013, 03:35:36 PM
That's not a bad idea.  Now, where's that suggestion box??  ;)

Choy for Pope!!  ;D  Uh oh...wait a minute...

Hey, I still have Catholic baptismal records ;)

Ooohhh, if that were to happen I don't know what I'll do first.  Abolish the Tridentine Mass and replace it with the Divine Liturgy?  Reinstate infant Communion and Confirmation?  I KNOW!  Anathemize the SSPX!  :D :D :D

I'll keep Pastor Aeternus until I'm done 'doxing Rome ;)


done forget about making latin an illegal language as well :-P
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 12, 2013, 03:41:07 PM
That's not a bad idea.  Now, where's that suggestion box??  ;)

Choy for Pope!!  ;D  Uh oh...wait a minute...

Hey, I still have Catholic baptismal records ;)


And Stalin probably had Orthodox baptismal records.  What's your point  ;) ;D ;) ;D?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Monk Vasyl on March 12, 2013, 03:50:11 PM
They do need to reform the Curia and get rid of that abomination known as the Congregataion of the Oriental Churches.

When I was still a Franciscan and contemplating switching Rites, I knew a Ruthenian Rite priest who referred to the Congregation of the Oriental Churches as the Vatican's version of the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

Well, we Ruthenians are a pretty wild bunch  ;).



Archbishop Joseph Tawil (of eternal memory) for the Melkites was pretty intense, too.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 12, 2013, 03:54:55 PM
With the papal election this week, I thought a discussion on the general topic based on news reports might be of interest. Not Orthodox/Catholic discussion, just the news aspect.

Here is an interesting quote on the conclave process from a Georgetown U. Church history professor:

"The conclave is a process that dates to the Middle Ages. Until the 11th century, the process of picking popes was “a mess and inconsistent,” said Georgetown University history professor the Rev. David Collins. The popes were picked by various combinations of the clergy in Rome and the generation population. At that time, popes served as the head of Christianity in Western Europe and as the bishop of Rome. The city was governed by several prominent families, and the pope would come from one of those families."  http://m.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/papal-conclave-has-tight-structure-uncertain-length/2013/03/11/044128a4-8a5c-11e2-8d72-dc76641cb8d4_story.html


Not many RCs would admit to this ;)
Are you sure of that?

Yes.  At least those who are the "internet apologist" types.  They seem to always want to paint a rosy picture of Church history where the Roman Catholics never do anything wrong, everything is organized, you know, the sun is always shining at the Vatican.
I've never met these people. Most Catholics I know realize full-well that Church has some dark chapters in her history. We are going though such a chapter now with the sex abuse crisis.

I have to say that I haven't met these people either.  I have met, however, a number of people, on the internet and in person, who love nothing more than to criticize, degrade, and belittle the Catholic Church, seeing no good in her whatsoever, always ready to jump on the slightest fault or perceived fault.  For some it seems almost a raison d'etre.
I've met quite a few of these people as well.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 12, 2013, 03:54:55 PM
Very BLACK smoke per CNN.
That much was expected. They say that the first vote determines who actually has a chance of being elected.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 12, 2013, 03:54:55 PM
They do need to reform the Curia and get rid of that abomination known as the Congregataion of the Oriental Churches.

Because you say so?  8)
It's the best reason I can see.  ;)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 12, 2013, 03:54:55 PM
They do need to reform the Curia and get rid of that abomination known as the Congregataion of the Oriental Churches.

When I was still a Franciscan and contemplating switching Rites, I knew a Ruthenian Rite priest who referred to the Congregation of the Oriental Churches as the Vatican's version of the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

Well, we Ruthenians are a pretty wild bunch  ;).


I love Ruthenians! We have a lovely Ruthenian parish here in Albquerque. :)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Deacon Lance on March 12, 2013, 03:56:21 PM
No Orthodox Patriarch is spiritual father of 1 billion +.  If the Pope had the flock of a single nation or a few million souls I doubt there would be much fanfare.

Irrelevant. Orthodoxy isn't about being popular or mighty. It's about defending and proclaiming the truth.
I didn't say it was.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 12, 2013, 04:02:46 PM
They do need to reform the Curia and get rid of that abomination known as the Congregataion of the Oriental Churches.

When I was still a Franciscan and contemplating switching Rites, I knew a Ruthenian Rite priest who referred to the Congregation of the Oriental Churches as the Vatican's version of the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

Well, we Ruthenians are a pretty wild bunch  ;).


I love Ruthenians! We have a lovely Ruthenian parish here in Albquerque. :)

Well, we're as loveable as we are wild  :angel: :angel:.

I've seen pictures of it (yes, it is beautiful!), and I think they produced a video of the Divine Liturgy, didn't they?  (Or am I thinking of somewhere else?)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Deacon Lance on March 12, 2013, 04:11:02 PM
No Orthodox Patriarch is spiritual father of 1 billion +.  If the Pope had the flock of a single nation or a few million souls I doubt there would be much fanfare.

Irrelevant. Orthodoxy isn't about being popular or mighty. It's about defending and proclaiming the truth.

Come on kids, cut it out. My point was simple. Patriarchal selection and deposition has historically been as flawed as that of the Roman popes. For example, look up Emperor Romanus I and his choice of his fourth son, 16 year old Theophylact, for the Patriarchal throne to succeed the aged once deposed and  twice enthroned Nicholas Mysticus. Poor Theophylact was castrated first so that he would not be unduly distracted from his churchly duties - something that perhaps should have been considered for Alexander Sixtus by the Curia.

This isn't a criticism of the current Patriarch, but come on, as an example, the current Patriarch of the "Third Rome" certainly projects a sense of power, fancy vestiture and media savvy as well as any Pope could hope for.


My dear Podkarpatska, I was merely responding to Deacon Lance's rather boastful post, which equates numbers with a church's importance.  :)

No boast, a statement of fact.  The Pope is spiritual father to a billion + people, ergo the conclave gets a lot of fanfare and media coverage.  That was all I was commenting on.  Did you know the Coptic Catholics Synod elected a new patriarch 1/16/13 and enthroned him 3/12/13?  Probably not.  The media doesn't care so much.  It doesn't mean the Coptic Catholic are less important the the Latin Catholics.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: orthonorm on March 12, 2013, 04:11:14 PM
"Letting Go WHY BENEDICT'S RESIGNATION MATTERS"  an article by Orthodox priest, Fr.John Harvey in Commonweal magazine.

"The humility of his decision to give up power is, and this really does matter. It will affect future papacies, all to the good. There is something of kenosis in giving up any power you could hold on to, and God bless Benedict for doing this. I hope it spells the beginning of a rethinking of the nature of papal power. Lord Acton went to Rome during the First Vatican Council to lobby against the idea of papal infallibility, and his oft-quoted line “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely” was a reference to the papacy. I believe Benedict’s resignation was a genuinely selfless act, done for the good of all."  http://www.commonwealmagazine.org/letting-go


People need to learn to wait a while when giving out laurels.

In the RCC, races are long run. We'll see how this turns out.

Chuckle at kenosis.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: orthonorm on March 12, 2013, 04:12:57 PM
No Orthodox Patriarch is spiritual father of 1 billion +.  If the Pope had the flock of a single nation or a few million souls I doubt there would be much fanfare.

Irrelevant. Orthodoxy isn't about being popular or mighty. It's about defending and proclaiming the truth.

Come on kids, cut it out. My point was simple. Patriarchal selection and deposition has historically been as flawed as that of the Roman popes. For example, look up Emperor Romanus I and his choice of his fourth son, 16 year old Theophylact, for the Patriarchal throne to succeed the aged once deposed and  twice enthroned Nicholas Mysticus. Poor Theophylact was castrated first so that he would not be unduly distracted from his churchly duties - something that perhaps should have been considered for Alexander Sixtus by the Curia.

This isn't a criticism of the current Patriarch, but come on, as an example, the current Patriarch of the "Third Rome" certainly projects a sense of power, fancy vestiture and media savvy as well as any Pope could hope for.


My dear Podkarpatska, I was merely responding to Deacon Lance's rather boastful post, which equates numbers with a church's importance.  :)

No boast, a statement of fact.  The Pope is spiritual father to a billion + people, ergo the conclave gets a lot of fanfare and media coverage.  That was all I was commenting on.  Did you know the Coptic Catholics Synod elected a new patriarch 1/16/13 and enthroned him 3/12/13?  Probably not.  The media doesn't care so much.  It doesn't mean the Coptic Catholic are less important the the Latin Catholics.

Deacon,

You are alright. I think most people got your point. It is a valid one regardless whether other like it or not.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: podkarpatska on March 12, 2013, 05:03:08 PM
They do need to reform the Curia and get rid of that abomination known as the Congregataion of the Oriental Churches.

Because you say so?  8)

Actually it is an old Eastern Catholic joke to refer to the Congregation as the Vatican's " BIA" (referring to the unlamented American agency called the "Bureau of Indian Affairs" or, for you Brits - the "Colonial Office."   ;)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: podkarpatska on March 12, 2013, 05:07:03 PM
They do need to reform the Curia and get rid of that abomination known as the Congregataion of the Oriental Churches.

When I was still a Franciscan and contemplating switching Rites, I knew a Ruthenian Rite priest who referred to the Congregation of the Oriental Churches as the Vatican's version of the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

Well, we Ruthenians are a pretty wild bunch  ;).



Hee hee, only the Romans and the Magyars called the Rusyns "Ruthenians."  :D. As has been noted before, that's a whole 'nother can of worms!
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Benjamin the Red on March 12, 2013, 05:33:44 PM
They do need to reform the Curia and get rid of that abomination known as the Congregataion of the Oriental Churches.

When I was still a Franciscan and contemplating switching Rites, I knew a Ruthenian Rite priest who referred to the Congregation of the Oriental Churches as the Vatican's version of the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

Well, we Ruthenians are a pretty wild bunch  ;).



Hee hee, only the Romans and the Magyars called the Rusyns "Ruthenians."  :D. As has been noted before, that's a whole 'nother can of worms!

Lol. That reminds me, I've never asked the ethnic folks I know in ACROD how they feel about the term "Ruthenian." I think I'll do that next time I see them... ;D
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 12, 2013, 06:12:41 PM
Are they really only limited to Cardinals?  I am hoping an Eastern Catholic bishop gets elected.   ;D
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Deacon Lance on March 12, 2013, 06:33:30 PM
Are they really only limited to Cardinals?  I am hoping an Eastern Catholic bishop gets elected.   ;D
They aren't even limited to bishops.  Technically, any male Catholic is eligible.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 12, 2013, 07:08:57 PM
Are they really only limited to Cardinals?  I am hoping an Eastern Catholic bishop gets elected.   ;D
They aren't even limited to bishops.  Technically, any male Catholic is eligible.

Tehcnically, but wasn't there a clause added that the pool be limited to Cardinals?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 12, 2013, 07:10:37 PM
Are they really only limited to Cardinals?  I am hoping an Eastern Catholic bishop gets elected.   ;D

Some Eastern Catholic bishops are also cardinals, aren't they?
Since they would be required to wear the red at this conclave, they would be indistinguishable from their Latin counterparts.

How many Eastern Catholic "cardinals" are attending this conclave?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Benjamin the Red on March 12, 2013, 07:11:39 PM
Are they really only limited to Cardinals?  I am hoping an Eastern Catholic bishop gets elected.   ;D
They aren't even limited to bishops.  Technically, any male Catholic is eligible.

Tehcnically, but wasn't there a clause added that the pool be limited to Cardinals?

I don't think so (someone correct me if I'm wrong). I just think that electing the new Pope from the College is a well-established custom at this point, and no one expects to deviate from it.

There are Patriarchs of the Eastern Catholic Churches that serve as Cardinals. One of them could, potentially, be elected.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Benjamin the Red on March 12, 2013, 07:15:27 PM
Are they really only limited to Cardinals?  I am hoping an Eastern Catholic bishop gets elected.   ;D

Some Eastern Catholic bishops are also cardinals, aren't they?
Since they would be required to wear the red at this conclave, they would be indistinguishable from their Latin counterparts.

How many Eastern Catholic cardinals are attending this conclave?

Idk how many EC Cardinals are at the Conclave, I think only three or four (two Coptic, the sitting one and the retired one, the Syro-Malabar Patriarch and the Melkite Patriarch)

But, while they wear red, they maintain a mostly traditional style to their particular churches, and thereby are distinguishable from the Latin cardinals:

(http://www.cnewa.us/bulletin-images/bulletinimages-2012/cns1127-1.jpg)
Quote
New Cardinal Bechara Rai, Lebanon's Maronite Patriarch, center, talks with new U.S. Cardinal James M. Harvey, former prefect of the papal household, before Pope Benedict XVI's audience in Paul VI hall at the Vatican 26 Nov. Also pictured at left is new Syro-Malankara Cardinal Baselios Cleemis Thottunkal of Trivandrum, India. The pope created six new cardinals from four different continents at a 24 Nov. consistory. (Photo: CNS/Paul Haring)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 12, 2013, 07:18:08 PM
Are they really only limited to Cardinals?  I am hoping an Eastern Catholic bishop gets elected.   ;D

Some Eastern Catholic bishops are also cardinals, aren't they?
Since they would be required to wear the red at this conclave, they would be indistinguishable from their Latin counterparts.

How many Eastern Catholic cardinals are attending this conclave?

Idk how many EC Cardinals are at the Conclave, I think only three or four (two Coptic, the sitting one and the retired one, the Syro-Malabar Patriarch and the Melkite Patriarch)

But, while they wear red, they maintain a mostly traditional style to their particular churches, and thereby are distinguishable from the Latin cardinals:

(http://www.cnewa.us/bulletin-images/bulletinimages-2012/cns1127-1.jpg)
Quote
New Cardinal Bechara Rai, Lebanon's Maronite Patriarch, center, talks with new U.S. Cardinal James M. Harvey, former prefect of the papal household, before Pope Benedict XVI's audience in Paul VI hall at the Vatican 26 Nov. Also pictured at left is new Syro-Malankara Cardinal Baselios Cleemis Thottunkal of Trivandrum, India. The pope created six new cardinals from four different continents at a 24 Nov. consistory. (Photo: CNS/Paul Haring)

The news media pictures of the cardinals filing into the Sistine Chapel showed strict conformity in dress. Nothing strange stood out.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Benjamin the Red on March 12, 2013, 07:26:10 PM
Are they really only limited to Cardinals?  I am hoping an Eastern Catholic bishop gets elected.   ;D

Some Eastern Catholic bishops are also cardinals, aren't they?
Since they would be required to wear the red at this conclave, they would be indistinguishable from their Latin counterparts.

How many Eastern Catholic cardinals are attending this conclave?

Idk how many EC Cardinals are at the Conclave, I think only three or four (two Coptic, the sitting one and the retired one, the Syro-Malabar Patriarch and the Melkite Patriarch)

But, while they wear red, they maintain a mostly traditional style to their particular churches, and thereby are distinguishable from the Latin cardinals:

(http://www.cnewa.us/bulletin-images/bulletinimages-2012/cns1127-1.jpg)
Quote
New Cardinal Bechara Rai, Lebanon's Maronite Patriarch, center, talks with new U.S. Cardinal James M. Harvey, former prefect of the papal household, before Pope Benedict XVI's audience in Paul VI hall at the Vatican 26 Nov. Also pictured at left is new Syro-Malankara Cardinal Baselios Cleemis Thottunkal of Trivandrum, India. The pope created six new cardinals from four different continents at a 24 Nov. consistory. (Photo: CNS/Paul Haring)

The news media pictures of the cardinals filing into the Sistine Chapel showed strict conformity in dress. Nothing strange stood out.

I watched the same procession (as they sung the Litany of Saints) into the Sistine Chapel on EWTN. I promise that there were Eastern Catholic cardinals in such attire as the above photo. There aren't many, so it may be hard to pick out someone dressed in a slightly different red garment that is the same color as all the other red garments! 3 or 4 out of 115, I imagine, is a pretty hard spot.

Did secular news cover the individual oath-taking of each cardinal in the Sistine Chapel? EWTN showed coverage continually from the end of the Mass all the way until the sealing of the doors at the Sistine Chapel, and so you got to see each cardinal come up and lay their hands upon the Gospel in the center of the chapel. Several Eastern Catholic Patriarch-Cardinals came up, dressed as above.

EWTN probably has the footage on the website, if you want to comb through it. If I have some time later tonight, I may hunt it down for you.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 12, 2013, 07:30:58 PM
Yes, I would like to see those news clips.

Unfortunately, I do not get EWTN. We have never been able to get it even when we had satellite or cable TV.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Benjamin the Red on March 12, 2013, 07:34:28 PM
Yes, I would like to see those news clips.

Unfortunately, I do not get EWTN. We have never been able to get it even when we had satellite or cable TV.

We don't have satellite or cable here, either. But I refer you to my previous post in the thread:

If you're looking for some decent video coverage of the Conclave, EWTN has a live stream (http://www.ewtn.com/multimedia/live_player.asp).

;)

EDIT: And that is the link for the live stream for EWTN, period. You can just watch them live, everything they run. I think they also have a section on their website dedicated to the Conclave, so I imagine you can see their broadcast schedule as relevant thereto.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Benjamin the Red on March 12, 2013, 07:44:39 PM
I found a photo of the procession today into the Sistine Chapel on Huff-Po, On the left side of the photo in the back you can see an Eastern Catholic Patriarch-Cardinal in traditional dress. I think he is the Syro-Malabar Patriarch, but I could very well be wrong.

(http://i.huffpost.com/gen/1034275/thumbs/r-BLACK-SMOKE-CONCLAVE-large570.jpg?6)

Link to the article here (http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/03/12/black-smoke-jokes-papal-conclave_n_2862167.html). Apologies that the article is a bit tongue-in-cheek (I mean, it is Huff-Po), but it had the photo I was looking for!
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 12, 2013, 07:53:25 PM
I found a photo of the procession today into the Sistine Chapel on Huff-Po, On the left side of the photo in the back you can see an Eastern Catholic Patriarch-Cardinal in traditional dress. I think he is the Syro-Malabar Patriarch, but I could very well be wrong.

(http://i.huffpost.com/gen/1034275/thumbs/r-BLACK-SMOKE-CONCLAVE-large570.jpg?6)

Link to the article here (http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/03/12/black-smoke-jokes-papal-conclave_n_2862167.html). Apologies that the article is a bit tongue-in-cheek (I mean, it is Huff-Po), but it had the photo I was looking for!

Complete with the clowns!
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: orthonorm on March 12, 2013, 08:20:34 PM
Are they really only limited to Cardinals?  I am hoping an Eastern Catholic bishop gets elected.   ;D
They aren't even limited to bishops.  Technically, any male Catholic is eligible.

Dear Deacon,

Could you link to some source for this that would stand as proof. I thought that indeed any RC male could serve but I was told by everyone today who knows what they know from the TV over the last day that only a Cardinal can be elected.

Thanks.

p.s. My opinion is formed by mere speculation given how I understand RC theology.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Nephi on March 12, 2013, 08:24:41 PM
Are they really only limited to Cardinals?  I am hoping an Eastern Catholic bishop gets elected.   ;D
They aren't even limited to bishops.  Technically, any male Catholic is eligible.

Would a layperson made Pope be immediately made a bishop or something? In order to perform Mass, etc.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 12, 2013, 08:26:59 PM
Are they really only limited to Cardinals?  I am hoping an Eastern Catholic bishop gets elected.   ;D
They aren't even limited to bishops.  Technically, any male Catholic is eligible.

Would a layperson made Pope be immediately made a bishop or something? In order to perform Mass, etc.

The male selected would have to go through ordination to the diaconate, priesthood, and then be ordained a bishop. This would take some time, so obviously he would not be elevated to the papacy immediately.

If he were married, he and his wife would have to agree to separate before he could be ordained.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: podkarpatska on March 12, 2013, 08:46:47 PM
Are they really only limited to Cardinals?  I am hoping an Eastern Catholic bishop gets elected.   ;D
They aren't even limited to bishops.  Technically, any male Catholic is eligible.

Would a layperson made Pope be immediately made a bishop or something? In order to perform Mass, etc.

The male selected would have to go through ordination to the diaconate, priesthood, and then be ordained a bishop. This would take some time, so obviously he would not be elevated to the papacy immediately.

If he were married, he and his wife would have to agree to separate before he could be ordained.

Consider the example of St. Tarasios, Patriarch of Constantinople, one of a number of laymen to be so elevated:

"Tarasios was born and raised in the city of Constantinople. A son of a high-ranking judge, Tarasios was related to important families, including that of the later Patriarch Photios the Great. Tarasios had embarked on a career in the secular administration and had attained the rank of senator, eventually becoming imperial secretary (asekretis) to the Emperor Constantine VI and his mother, the Empress Irene. Originally he embraced Iconoclasm, but later repented, resigned his post, and retired to a monastery, taking the &Great Schema (monastic habit). Since he exhibited both Iconodule sympathies and the willingness to follow imperial commands when they were not contrary to the faith, he was selected as Patriarch of Constantinople by the Empress Irene in 784, even though he was a layman at the time. Nevertheless, like all educated Byzantines, he was well versed in theology, and the election of qualified laymen as bishops was not unheard of in the history of the Church. He reluctantly accepted, on condition that church unity would be restored with Rome and the oriental Patriarchs.To make him eligible for the office of patriarch, Tarasios was duly ordained to the deaconate and then the priesthood, prior to his consecration as bishop."  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriarch_Tarasios_of_Constantinople

And the greatest lay person chosen: St. Photius:

"Photios was a well-educated man from a noble Constantinopolitan family. Photius's great uncle was the previous Patriarch of Constantinople, Tarasius. He intended to be a monk, but chose to be a scholar and statesman instead. In 858, Emperor Michael III (r. 842–867) deposed Patriarch Ignatius of Constantinople, and Photios, still a layman, was appointed in his place. Amid power struggles between the pope and the Byzantine emperor, Ignatius was reinstated. Photios resumed the position when Ignatius died (877), by order of the Byzantine emperor.The new pope, John VIII, approved Photios's reinstatement. Catholics regard a Fourth Council of Constantinople (Roman Catholic) as anathematizing Photios as legitimate. Eastern Orthodox regard a second council named the Fourth Council of Constantinople (Eastern Orthodox), reversing the first, as legitimate.The contested Ecumenical Councils mark the end of unity represented by the first seven Ecumenical Councils."
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photios_I_of_Constantinople
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Deacon Lance on March 12, 2013, 09:40:49 PM
Are they really only limited to Cardinals?  I am hoping an Eastern Catholic bishop gets elected.   ;D
They aren't even limited to bishops.  Technically, any male Catholic is eligible.

Tehcnically, but wasn't there a clause added that the pool be limited to Cardinals?
No.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Deacon Lance on March 12, 2013, 09:49:28 PM
I found a photo of the procession today into the Sistine Chapel on Huff-Po, On the left side of the photo in the back you can see an Eastern Catholic Patriarch-Cardinal in traditional dress. I think he is the Syro-Malabar Patriarch, but I could very well be wrong.

(http://i.huffpost.com/gen/1034275/thumbs/r-BLACK-SMOKE-CONCLAVE-large570.jpg?6)

Link to the article here (http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/03/12/black-smoke-jokes-papal-conclave_n_2862167.html). Apologies that the article is a bit tongue-in-cheek (I mean, it is Huff-Po), but it had the photo I was looking for!

That is the Syro-Malankar Archbishop although the Syro-Malabar Archbishop is there as well but his outfit is the same as the Latins with a slightly different biretta.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: William on March 12, 2013, 09:52:24 PM
With the papal election this week, I thought a discussion on the general topic based on news reports might be of interest. Not Orthodox/Catholic discussion, just the news aspect.

Here is an interesting quote on the conclave process from a Georgetown U. Church history professor:

"The conclave is a process that dates to the Middle Ages. Until the 11th century, the process of picking popes was “a mess and inconsistent,” said Georgetown University history professor the Rev. David Collins. The popes were picked by various combinations of the clergy in Rome and the generation population. At that time, popes served as the head of Christianity in Western Europe and as the bishop of Rome. The city was governed by several prominent families, and the pope would come from one of those families."  http://m.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/papal-conclave-has-tight-structure-uncertain-length/2013/03/11/044128a4-8a5c-11e2-8d72-dc76641cb8d4_story.html


Not many RCs would admit to this ;)

Rather they are ignorant of this. 
Yes, I dare say most people-whether in the Vatican's flock or outside it-don't know that the present system isn't even a thousand years old.  Though, mystique and all, the Vatican isn't troubled by this misconception, but it will readily admit to this.

If they elect a non-Italian, the Italian monopoly is pretty much over.  And all the names I've been seeing are non-Italians.

I was watching Fox News this afternoon (which interestingly enough featured both a radically right-wing Zionist commercial and a commercial calling for acceptance of homosexual marriage) and they called it an "ancient ritual." I'm not sure if that came from ignorance of the election rite's age or ignorance of what period "ancient" refers to.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Nephi on March 12, 2013, 10:06:44 PM
I was watching Fox News this afternoon (which interestingly enough featured both a radically right-wing Zionist commercial and a commercial calling for acceptance of homosexual marriage) and they called it an "ancient ritual." I'm not sure if that came from ignorance of the election rite's age or ignorance of what period "ancient" refers to.

I'd consider a thousand years "ancient," in the sense that it's very old. After all, "ancient" has other definitons that don't refer specifically to the "ancient Greeks and Romans," etc.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: TheMathematician on March 12, 2013, 10:08:36 PM
I was watching Fox News this afternoon (which interestingly enough featured both a radically right-wing Zionist commercial and a commercial calling for acceptance of homosexual marriage) and they called it an "ancient ritual." I'm not sure if that came from ignorance of the election rite's age or ignorance of what period "ancient" refers to.

I'd consider a thousand years "ancient," in the sense that it's very old. After all, "ancient" has other definitons that don't refer specifically to the "ancient Greeks and Romans," etc.

in french, the word ancien can be translated as either ancient or former, depending on the word order
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: William on March 12, 2013, 10:08:48 PM
I was watching Fox News this afternoon (which interestingly enough featured both a radically right-wing Zionist commercial and a commercial calling for acceptance of homosexual marriage) and they called it an "ancient ritual." I'm not sure if that came from ignorance of the election rite's age or ignorance of what period "ancient" refers to.

I'd consider a thousand years "ancient," in the sense that it's very old. After all, "ancient" has other definitons that don't refer specifically to the "ancient Greeks and Romans," etc.

Well, colloquially, words can mean anything. It's supposed to refer to antiquity, though.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Deacon Lance on March 12, 2013, 10:10:14 PM
Are they really only limited to Cardinals?  I am hoping an Eastern Catholic bishop gets elected.   ;D
They aren't even limited to bishops.  Technically, any male Catholic is eligible.

Would a layperson made Pope be immediately made a bishop or something? In order to perform Mass, etc.

The male selected would have to go through ordination to the diaconate, priesthood, and then be ordained a bishop. This would take some time, so obviously he would not be elevated to the papacy immediately.

If he were married, he and his wife would have to agree to separate before he could be ordained.

As Pope he could dispense himself from this.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 12, 2013, 10:11:27 PM
Are they really only limited to Cardinals?  I am hoping an Eastern Catholic bishop gets elected.   ;D
They aren't even limited to bishops.  Technically, any male Catholic is eligible.

Would a layperson made Pope be immediately made a bishop or something? In order to perform Mass, etc.

The male selected would have to go through ordination to the diaconate, priesthood, and then be ordained a bishop. This would take some time, so obviously he would not be elevated to the papacy immediately.

If he were married, he and his wife would have to agree to separate before he could be ordained.

As Pope he could dispense himself from this.

But could not the Bishops and Cardinals refuse to ordain him?

Oh, I guess an Eastern Catholic Bishop could without any hesitation.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Deacon Lance on March 12, 2013, 10:16:08 PM
Are they really only limited to Cardinals?  I am hoping an Eastern Catholic bishop gets elected.   ;D
They aren't even limited to bishops.  Technically, any male Catholic is eligible.

Dear Deacon,

Could you link to some source for this that would stand as proof. I thought that indeed any RC male could serve but I was told by everyone today who knows what they know from the TV over the last day that only a Cardinal can be elected.

Thanks.

p.s. My opinion is formed by mere speculation given how I understand RC theology.

88. After his acceptance, the person elected, if he has already received episcopal ordination, is immediately Bishop of the Church of Rome, true Pope and Head of the College of Bishops. He thus acquires and can exercise full and supreme power over the universal Church.

If the person elected is not already a Bishop, he shall immediately be ordained Bishop.

89. When the other formalities provided for in the Ordo Rituum Conclavis have been carried out, the Cardinal electors approach the newly-elected Pope in the prescribed manner, in order to make an act of homage and obedience. An act of thanksgiving to God is then made, after which the senior Cardinal Deacon announces to the waiting people that the election has taken place and proclaims the name of the new Pope, who immedi- ately thereafter imparts the Apostolic Blessing Urbi et Orbi from the balcony of the Vatican Basilica.

If the person elected is not already a Bishop, homage is paid to him and the announcement of his election is made only after he has been solemnly ordained Bishop.

90. If the person elected resides outside Vatican City, the norms contained in the Ordo Rituum Conclavis are to be observed.

If the newly-elected Supreme Pontiff is not already a Bishop, his episcopal ordination, referred to in Nos. 88 and 89 of the present Constitution, shall be carried out according to the usage of the Church by the Dean of the College of Cardinals or, in his absence, by the Subdean or, should he too be prevented from doing so, by the senior Cardinal Bishop.

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_constitutions/documents/hf_jp-ii_apc_22021996_universi-dominici-gregis_en.html
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Nephi on March 12, 2013, 10:17:28 PM
Well, colloquially, words can mean anything. It's supposed to refer to antiquity, though.

This (http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/ancient) definition,"of or from a long time ago, having lasted for a very long time" seems to fit the described context perfectly.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Deacon Lance on March 12, 2013, 10:24:32 PM
Are they really only limited to Cardinals?  I am hoping an Eastern Catholic bishop gets elected.   ;D
They aren't even limited to bishops.  Technically, any male Catholic is eligible.

Would a layperson made Pope be immediately made a bishop or something? In order to perform Mass, etc.

Yes.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 12, 2013, 10:25:07 PM
Are they really only limited to Cardinals?  I am hoping an Eastern Catholic bishop gets elected.   ;D
They aren't even limited to bishops.  Technically, any male Catholic is eligible.

Would a layperson made Pope be immediately made a bishop or something? In order to perform Mass, etc.

The male selected would have to go through ordination to the diaconate, priesthood, and then be ordained a bishop. This would take some time, so obviously he would not be elevated to the papacy immediately.

If he were married, he and his wife would have to agree to separate before he could be ordained.

As Pope he could dispense himself from this.

He can't dispense stuff until he becomes a Pope.  A Pope is a bishop.  Bishops are celibate.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 12, 2013, 10:26:01 PM
I was watching Fox News this afternoon (which interestingly enough featured both a radically right-wing Zionist commercial and a commercial calling for acceptance of homosexual marriage) and they called it an "ancient ritual." I'm not sure if that came from ignorance of the election rite's age or ignorance of what period "ancient" refers to.

I'd consider a thousand years "ancient," in the sense that it's very old. After all, "ancient" has other definitons that don't refer specifically to the "ancient Greeks and Romans," etc.

RCs believe in many stuff to be ancient which actually just originated in Trent, which is 500 years old.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: William on March 12, 2013, 10:29:38 PM
Well, colloquially, words can mean anything. It's supposed to refer to antiquity, though.

This (http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/ancient) definition,"of or from a long time ago, having lasted for a very long time" seems to fit the described context perfectly.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Deacon Lance on March 12, 2013, 10:35:26 PM
Are they really only limited to Cardinals?  I am hoping an Eastern Catholic bishop gets elected.   ;D

Some Eastern Catholic bishops are also cardinals, aren't they?
Since they would be required to wear the red at this conclave, they would be indistinguishable from their Latin counterparts.

How many Eastern Catholic "cardinals" are attending this conclave?

There are eight Eastern Catholic Cardinals.  Four were eligible to vote in conclave.  One anomaly is that the Patriarch emeritus of the Coptic Catholics is eligible to vote while the current Patriarch was enthroned 3/12/13 and isn't a cardinal.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Nephi on March 12, 2013, 10:41:24 PM
Well, colloquially, words can mean anything. It's supposed to refer to antiquity, though.

This (http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/ancient) definition,"of or from a long time ago, having lasted for a very long time" seems to fit the described context perfectly.
Actually click the link I provided.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Deacon Lance on March 12, 2013, 10:42:24 PM
Are they really only limited to Cardinals?  I am hoping an Eastern Catholic bishop gets elected.   ;D
They aren't even limited to bishops.  Technically, any male Catholic is eligible.

Would a layperson made Pope be immediately made a bishop or something? In order to perform Mass, etc.

The male selected would have to go through ordination to the diaconate, priesthood, and then be ordained a bishop. This would take some time, so obviously he would not be elevated to the papacy immediately.

If he were married, he and his wife would have to agree to separate before he could be ordained.

As Pope he could dispense himself from this.

He can't dispense stuff until he becomes a Pope.  A Pope is a bishop.  Bishops are celibate.
So he would be celibate for a few days before ordination and dispense himself once he was Pope.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: podkarpatska on March 12, 2013, 10:44:45 PM
"Media myopia in Rome" Good op-ed by Kathleen Parker in tomorrow's Washington Post. What she says about Catholicism and modern secularism applies to the Orthodox as well. http://m.washingtonpost.com/opinions/kathleen-parker-media-at-vatican-misread-the-catholic-mission/2013/03/12/dfa64724-8b4e-11e2-b63f-f53fb9f2fcb4_story.html
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 12, 2013, 10:49:57 PM
Are they really only limited to Cardinals?  I am hoping an Eastern Catholic bishop gets elected.   ;D
They aren't even limited to bishops.  Technically, any male Catholic is eligible.

Would a layperson made Pope be immediately made a bishop or something? In order to perform Mass, etc.

The male selected would have to go through ordination to the diaconate, priesthood, and then be ordained a bishop. This would take some time, so obviously he would not be elevated to the papacy immediately.

If he were married, he and his wife would have to agree to separate before he could be ordained.

As Pope he could dispense himself from this.

He can't dispense stuff until he becomes a Pope.  A Pope is a bishop.  Bishops are celibate.
So he would be celibate for a few days before ordination and dispense himself once he was Pope.

That possible but not probable scenario is one reason why a married man would never be elected pope.


Oh, this in from NBC and AP.
http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/11/17213060-conclave-smoke-signals-a-bit-of-a-gray-area?lite

Quote
"Innovation is not in its DNA," Bellitto explained. "And nobody does ritual like the Catholic Church."

Seems like NBC and AP choose to ignore the Eastern Orthodox Church as nobody does ritual like the Orthodox!

Indeed, most of the rules of this papal conclave are post-1900. The smoking stoves are a recent innovation as are the bug sweeping high tech devices that are employed prior to the beginning of the conclave.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: William on March 12, 2013, 10:50:53 PM
Well, colloquially, words can mean anything. It's supposed to refer to antiquity, though.

This (http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/ancient) definition,"of or from a long time ago, having lasted for a very long time" seems to fit the described context perfectly.
Actually click the link I provided.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 12, 2013, 10:52:18 PM
Seems like NBC and AP choose to ignore the Eastern Orthodox Church as nobody does ritual like the Orthodox!

We don't have to be insecure about it.  We don't need the attention of the liberal media who only seeks to ridicule the Catholic Church anyway.  Had they have more awareness of the Orthodox Church, they'd ridicule us as well.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 12, 2013, 10:53:19 PM
He can't dispense stuff until he becomes a Pope.  A Pope is a bishop.  Bishops are celibate.
So he would be celibate for a few days before ordination and dispense himself once he was Pope.

And we just created a case study as to why Pastor Aeternus is wrong.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Nephi on March 12, 2013, 10:55:48 PM
Well, colloquially, words can mean anything. It's supposed to refer to antiquity, though.

This (http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/ancient) definition,"of or from a long time ago, having lasted for a very long time" seems to fit the described context perfectly.
Actually click the link I provided.

And you obviously didn't, otherwise you'd have seen the distinction between the formal and informal (colloquial) definitions.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Deacon Lance on March 12, 2013, 10:56:22 PM
I found a photo of the procession today into the Sistine Chapel on Huff-Po, On the left side of the photo in the back you can see an Eastern Catholic Patriarch-Cardinal in traditional dress. I think he is the Syro-Malabar Patriarch, but I could very well be wrong.

(http://i.huffpost.com/gen/1034275/thumbs/r-BLACK-SMOKE-CONCLAVE-large570.jpg?6)

Link to the article here (http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/03/12/black-smoke-jokes-papal-conclave_n_2862167.html). Apologies that the article is a bit tongue-in-cheek (I mean, it is Huff-Po), but it had the photo I was looking for!

That is the Syro-Malankar Archbishop although the Syro-Malabar Archbishop is there as well but his outfit is the same as the Latins with a slightly different biretta.

Correction.  I just found a picture of the Syro-Malabar Archbishop and he was wearing a red riassa.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: William on March 12, 2013, 10:59:51 PM
Well, colloquially, words can mean anything. It's supposed to refer to antiquity, though.

This (http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/ancient) definition,"of or from a long time ago, having lasted for a very long time" seems to fit the described context perfectly.
Actually click the link I provided.

And you obviously didn't, otherwise you'd have seen the distinction between the formal and informal (colloquial) definitions.

Ancient is not a subjective term. It refers to a specific period. You cannot say ancient architecture and be referring to Baroque stuff, although the Baroque style is certainly "of a long time ago".

Don't let your jimmies get rustled over being wrong.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 12, 2013, 11:03:30 PM
Seems like NBC and AP choose to ignore the Eastern Orthodox Church as nobody does ritual like the Orthodox!

We don't have to be insecure about it.  We don't need the attention of the liberal media who only seeks to ridicule the Catholic Church anyway.  Had they have more awareness of the Orthodox Church, they'd ridicule us as well.

Just repeating what the Antiochians have been saying for a long time: that Orthodoxy is the best kept secret in the USA.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Deacon Lance on March 12, 2013, 11:04:42 PM
That possible but not probable scenario is one reason why a married man would never be elected pope.

It has already happened.  Pope Adrian II.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 12, 2013, 11:05:03 PM
I found a photo of the procession today into the Sistine Chapel on Huff-Po, On the left side of the photo in the back you can see an Eastern Catholic Patriarch-Cardinal in traditional dress. I think he is the Syro-Malabar Patriarch, but I could very well be wrong.

(http://i.huffpost.com/gen/1034275/thumbs/r-BLACK-SMOKE-CONCLAVE-large570.jpg?6)

Link to the article here (http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/03/12/black-smoke-jokes-papal-conclave_n_2862167.html). Apologies that the article is a bit tongue-in-cheek (I mean, it is Huff-Po), but it had the photo I was looking for!

That is the Syro-Malankar Archbishop although the Syro-Malabar Archbishop is there as well but his outfit is the same as the Latins with a slightly different biretta.

Correction.  I just found a picture of the Syro-Malabar Archbishop and he was wearing a red riassa.

Is this the Syro-Malabar Archbishop pictured in this photo, and not the Syro-Malankar Archbishop?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 12, 2013, 11:05:48 PM
That possible but not probable scenario is one reason why a married man would never be elected pope.

It has already happened.  Pope Adrian II.

How long ago? Before the Great Schism of 1054?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Deacon Lance on March 12, 2013, 11:19:41 PM
I found a photo of the procession today into the Sistine Chapel on Huff-Po, On the left side of the photo in the back you can see an Eastern Catholic Patriarch-Cardinal in traditional dress. I think he is the Syro-Malabar Patriarch, but I could very well be wrong.

(http://i.huffpost.com/gen/1034275/thumbs/r-BLACK-SMOKE-CONCLAVE-large570.jpg?6)

Link to the article here (http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/03/12/black-smoke-jokes-papal-conclave_n_2862167.html). Apologies that the article is a bit tongue-in-cheek (I mean, it is Huff-Po), but it had the photo I was looking for!

That is the Syro-Malankar Archbishop although the Syro-Malabar Archbishop is there as well but his outfit is the same as the Latins with a slightly different biretta.

Correction.  I just found a picture of the Syro-Malabar Archbishop and he was wearing a red riassa.

Is this the Syro-Malabar Archbishop pictured in this photo, and not the Syro-Malankar Archbishop?
No, it is the Syro-Malankar Archbishop.  I was correcting the statement the Syro-Malabar wore Latin choir dress.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Deacon Lance on March 12, 2013, 11:21:22 PM
That possible but not probable scenario is one reason why a married man would never be elected pope.

It has already happened.  Pope Adrian II.

How long ago? Before the Great Schism of 1054?
Yes, 867.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Nephi on March 12, 2013, 11:24:24 PM
Ancient is not a subjective term. It refers to a specific period. You cannot say ancient architecture and be referring to Baroque stuff, although the Baroque style is certainly "of a long time ago".

Don't let your jimmies get rustled over being wrong.

Is it at all necessary to be rude? I was pointing out that it was a formal definition given by the Cambridge dictionary, as compared to an informal one they listed, and fit the context you gave. If you could, please show me that the definition is wrong and I'll gladly admit that I was mistaken, and I'll maybe learn something in the process.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 12, 2013, 11:30:36 PM
That possible but not probable scenario is one reason why a married man would never be elected pope.

It has already happened.  Pope Adrian II.

How long ago? Before the Great Schism of 1054?

Yes, 867.

No wonder. The climate now in the Roman Catholic Church is decidedly against any married man being elected as a Bishop or as a Pope. However, back in 867 before the Great Schism, it was still possible for a married man to be elected as a Pope.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Deacon Lance on March 12, 2013, 11:36:52 PM
That possible but not probable scenario is one reason why a married man would never be elected pope.

It has already happened.  Pope Adrian II.

How long ago? Before the Great Schism of 1054?

Yes, 867.

No wonder. The climate now in the Roman Catholic Church is decidedly against any married man being elected as a Bishop or as a Pope. However, back in 867 before the Great Schism, it was still possible for a married man to be elected as a Pope.
Even at this time celibacy had been imposed and they disputed with the East about it.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 12, 2013, 11:38:06 PM
That possible but not probable scenario is one reason why a married man would never be elected pope.

It has already happened.  Pope Adrian II.

How long ago? Before the Great Schism of 1054?

Yes, 867.

No wonder. The climate now in the Roman Catholic Church is decidedly against any married man being elected as a Bishop or as a Pope. However, back in 867 before the Great Schism, it was still possible for a married man to be elected as a Pope.
Even at this time celibacy had been imposed and they disputed with the East about it.

Exactly, but with the passage of time, the West became even more hardened against marriage.
Thus, electing a married man at this particular conclave would be almost impossible, save a miracle.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Deacon Lance on March 12, 2013, 11:43:33 PM
That possible but not probable scenario is one reason why a married man would never be elected pope.

It has already happened.  Pope Adrian II.

How long ago? Before the Great Schism of 1054?

Yes, 867.

No wonder. The climate now in the Roman Catholic Church is decidedly against any married man being elected as a Bishop or as a Pope. However, back in 867 before the Great Schism, it was still possible for a married man to be elected as a Pope.
Even at this time celibacy had been imposed and they disputed with the East about it.

Exactly, but with the passage of time, the West became even more hardened against marriage.
Thus, electing a married man at this particular conclave would be almost impossible, save a miracle.

Sure, but it is also unlikely in the extreme that they would go outside the College of Cardinals at all.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 12, 2013, 11:54:06 PM
That possible but not probable scenario is one reason why a married man would never be elected pope.

It has already happened.  Pope Adrian II.

How long ago? Before the Great Schism of 1054?

Yes, 867.

No wonder. The climate now in the Roman Catholic Church is decidedly against any married man being elected as a Bishop or as a Pope. However, back in 867 before the Great Schism, it was still possible for a married man to be elected as a Pope.
Even at this time celibacy had been imposed and they disputed with the East about it.

Exactly, but with the passage of time, the West became even more hardened against marriage.
Thus, electing a married man at this particular conclave would be almost impossible, save a miracle.

Sure, but it is also unlikely in the extreme that they would go outside the College of Cardinals at all.

When was the last time that the "tight-knit" College of Cardinals (with all their bickering aside) elected a man outside of their own?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: serb1389 on March 13, 2013, 12:15:17 AM
That's actually a great question
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Deacon Lance on March 13, 2013, 12:53:42 AM
Pope Urban VI in 1378.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: SolEX01 on March 13, 2013, 12:55:23 AM
Has there been a time when a man elected Pope refused to accept?  ???
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 13, 2013, 01:03:31 AM
Has there been a time when a man elected Pope refused to accept?  ???

A man?

Which one: a layman, a priest, a bishop, or a cardinal? Or does it matter?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: SolEX01 on March 13, 2013, 01:04:37 AM
Has there been a time when a man elected Pope refused to accept?  ???

A man?

Which one: a layman, a priest, a bishop, or a cardinal? Or does it matter?

It doesn't matter.  Any man.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 13, 2013, 01:12:29 AM
Pope Urban VI in 1378.


Quote
On the death of Pope Gregory XI in 1378, a Roman mob surrounded the papal conclave to demand a Roman pope. The cardinals being under some haste and great pressure to avoid the return of the Papal seat to Avignon, Prignano was unanimously chosen Pope on 8 April 1378 as acceptable to the disunited[3] majority of French cardinals, taking the name Urban VI. Not being a Cardinal, he was not well known.

The Archbishop of Bari became Pope Urban VI, and his reign led to the Western Schism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Urban_VI



Help: Now I lost my bar with the link. How do I get that back?
I opened a window and put it back into position. Phew.

Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 13, 2013, 01:16:44 AM
From all the news stories that I have read, it seems highly improbable that a man outside the College of Cardinals will be elected Pope during this conclave, but that would be a shrewd move on the part of the Cardinals if they are trying to appease the Romans who want an Italian Pope.

Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Krysostomos on March 13, 2013, 05:19:41 AM
  I am hoping an Eastern Catholic bishop gets elected.   ;D
Me too! :) The former primate of the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church, major archbishop of Kiev emeritus Lubomir (Husar) is  even a cardinal. 8)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: AntonI on March 13, 2013, 10:48:22 AM
For those interested, here is a link to the best live blog for the conclave - insightful and gets right to the point (read it from the bottom up):

http://metro.co.uk/2013/03/12/papal-conclave-live-blog-will-it-be-white-smoke-or-not-3537372/

Also, prayers for the Cardinals!
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 13, 2013, 10:49:40 AM
So are we down to the Elite Eight?  ;D :D
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Nephi on March 13, 2013, 10:58:45 AM
So are we down to the Elite Eight?  ;D :D

Can't wait until it's down to the Elite Four. ;)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 13, 2013, 11:04:18 AM
Three votes down.

Pope Benedict XVI was elected on the fourth vote.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/13/us-pope-succession-idUSBRE92808520130313
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: mike on March 13, 2013, 11:23:58 AM
Idk how many EC Cardinals are at the Conclave, I think only three or four (two Coptic, the sitting one and the retired one, the Syro-Malabar Patriarch and the Melkite Patriarch)

There are 4: Maronite, Coptic, Syro-Malabar, and Syro-Malankar. The Melchite one refused to become a cardinal.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Benjamin the Red on March 13, 2013, 11:35:51 AM
Idk how many EC Cardinals are at the Conclave, I think only three or four (two Coptic, the sitting one and the retired one, the Syro-Malabar Patriarch and the Melkite Patriarch)

There are 4: Maronite, Coptic, Syro-Malabar, and Syro-Malankar. The Melchite one refused to become a cardinal.

Marionite, not Melkite! Thanks for the correction. I can't keep those Syriacs straight!  ;D
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: mike on March 13, 2013, 11:42:04 AM
Me too! :) The former primate of the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church, major archbishop of Kiev emeritus Lubomir (Husar) is  even a cardinal. 8)

He is too old to vote.

Has there been a time when a man elected Pope refused to accept?  ???

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1456472/

I recommend this movie.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Benjamin the Red on March 13, 2013, 11:46:00 AM
Me too! :) The former primate of the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church, major archbishop of Kiev emeritus Lubomir (Husar) is  even a cardinal. 8)

He is too old to vote.

He could, technically, still be elected though! But, over 80...doubtful he would be elected. I think that would make him the oldest pope at date of election, which, IIRC, Pope Benedict XVI currently holds. He was...78...?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Ivanov on March 13, 2013, 11:52:47 AM
Glory to God for all things!

I had spent a good bit of time this morning writing out a heartfelt reply to include in this thread, its topic and subsidiary topics, but decided it would be best to wait and pray before posting. I'm getting better at that. So, as an ex-RC, all I have to say is this:........

______________________________________________________________ . (I John 2:19)

Pray for me a sinner, my Orthodox brothers and sisters.

Ivanov (Now, Theophan.... baptized Jan. 19 (Feast of The Theophany) into the Holy Orthodox Church. Address: 33 AD Pentecost Ave., Jerusalem, Holy Land... and beyond.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: mike on March 13, 2013, 11:55:12 AM
Good morning, sir. How can we help you?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Ivanov on March 13, 2013, 12:00:24 PM
Good morning to you, sir! I did a Profile revision while posting my message above. Perhaps there was a tech glitch. My message seems to be posted properly now. Let me know if I need to do something differently.

In ICXC,

Theophan
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: mike on March 13, 2013, 12:02:31 PM
I still do not understand:
a) the point of your post
b) the sense of your post
c) how is it related to thread's title
d) how is it related to Christian News
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 13, 2013, 12:06:48 PM
That's not a bad idea.  Now, where's that suggestion box??  ;)

Choy for Pope!!  ;D  Uh oh...wait a minute...

Hey, I still have Catholic baptismal records ;)

Ooohhh, if that were to happen I don't know what I'll do first.  Abolish the Tridentine Mass and replace it with the Divine Liturgy?  Reinstate infant Communion and Confirmation?  I KNOW!  Anathemize the SSPX!  :D :D :D

I'll keep Pastor Aeternus until I'm done 'doxing Rome ;)
We would have an epic battle over the Tridentine Mass. There would probably be light sabers invovled. I'm almost certain that yours would be red.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 13, 2013, 12:06:48 PM
They do need to reform the Curia and get rid of that abomination known as the Congregataion of the Oriental Churches.

When I was still a Franciscan and contemplating switching Rites, I knew a Ruthenian Rite priest who referred to the Congregation of the Oriental Churches as the Vatican's version of the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

Well, we Ruthenians are a pretty wild bunch  ;).


I love Ruthenians! We have a lovely Ruthenian parish here in Albquerque. :)

Well, we're as loveable as we are wild  :angel: :angel:.

I've seen pictures of it (yes, it is beautiful!), and I think they produced a video of the Divine Liturgy, didn't they?  (Or am I thinking of somewhere else?)
I believe they have. The Ruthenian parish is like my second home.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 13, 2013, 12:06:48 PM
No Orthodox Patriarch is spiritual father of 1 billion +.  If the Pope had the flock of a single nation or a few million souls I doubt there would be much fanfare.

Irrelevant. Orthodoxy isn't about being popular or mighty. It's about defending and proclaiming the truth.

Come on kids, cut it out. My point was simple. Patriarchal selection and deposition has historically been as flawed as that of the Roman popes. For example, look up Emperor Romanus I and his choice of his fourth son, 16 year old Theophylact, for the Patriarchal throne to succeed the aged once deposed and  twice enthroned Nicholas Mysticus. Poor Theophylact was castrated first so that he would not be unduly distracted from his churchly duties - something that perhaps should have been considered for Alexander Sixtus by the Curia.

This isn't a criticism of the current Patriarch, but come on, as an example, the current Patriarch of the "Third Rome" certainly projects a sense of power, fancy vestiture and media savvy as well as any Pope could hope for.


My dear Podkarpatska, I was merely responding to Deacon Lance's rather boastful post, which equates numbers with a church's importance.  :)

No boast, a statement of fact.  The Pope is spiritual father to a billion + people, ergo the conclave gets a lot of fanfare and media coverage.  That was all I was commenting on.  Did you know the Coptic Catholics Synod elected a new patriarch 1/16/13 and enthroned him 3/12/13?  Probably not.  The media doesn't care so much.  It doesn't mean the Coptic Catholic are less important the the Latin Catholics.
LOL. In so many ways, they are. Although their (former?) primate I think was second in line taking the oath this morning, and they had a nice view of the back of his head (no one in the media recognized him).

I'd be curious how much play this gets in the media of, say, Finland or Greece, or Russia.  Or India.

The conclave gets a lot of fanfare....because it is designed for fanfare, like the British coronation, as revealed by the trouble being put into the simple burning of the ballots.  Everyone likes secrecy and suspense.  That the college has been enlarged to be somewhat more a representative body also helps: everyone likes to root for the home team.

Of course there is an importance that comes with numbers.  Chinese is spoken by over a billion people, and thus a world language.  It doesn't do you much good, however, outside of China.

I'm curious what would happen (and could it happen) if the Copts in submission to the Vatican adopted the method of the Orthodox Copts in selecting their Pope (ooops! Patriarch-Alexandria under the Vatican's rules isn't allowed to have its title), namely the child picking the name.  What would happen if their primate was so chosen-by the hand of God as it were-and the "supreme authority in the church" refused to confirm him?

That part, the child picking the name, done elsewhere in the Orthodox world too, is the only vaguely interesting thing of Orthodox episcopal elections, enthronements.  Otherwise, they are pretty much like the vote of the electoral college and its confirmation in the US, as opposed to the general election for President (where most people aren't aware they are electing electors), which resembles a conclave as far as interest goes.  Conventions have gone from that in the US to the hum drum of the electoral college and Orthodox episcopal selections, and the ratings show it.

Btw, nothing wrong with fanfare.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 13, 2013, 12:11:18 PM
That possible but not probable scenario is one reason why a married man would never be elected pope.

It has already happened.  Pope Adrian II.

How long ago? Before the Great Schism of 1054?

Yes, 867.

No wonder. The climate now in the Roman Catholic Church is decidedly against any married man being elected as a Bishop or as a Pope. However, back in 867 before the Great Schism, it was still possible for a married man to be elected as a Pope.
Even at this time celibacy had been imposed and they disputed with the East about it.

Exactly, but with the passage of time, the West became even more hardened against marriage.
Thus, electing a married man at this particular conclave would be almost impossible, save a miracle.

Sure, but it is also unlikely in the extreme that they would go outside the College of Cardinals at all.

When was the last time that the "tight-knit" College of Cardinals (with all their bickering aside) elected a man outside of their own?
1378. It was the start of their Great Schism.
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_tkkjn54Lcxw/TNSvpiaOA1I/AAAAAAAAAH8/6ctCEoKK2oU/s1600/KISH219.jpg)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 13, 2013, 12:13:20 PM
  I am hoping an Eastern Catholic bishop gets elected.   ;D
Me too! :) The former primate of the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church, major archbishop of Kiev emeritus Lubomir (Husar) is  even a cardinal. 8)
He lost the right to vote, however, between the announcement of the resignation and the sede vacans.  I was looking for him but did not see him. Did he come?

Some are rooting for his successor MAbp. Shevchuk.  That would make things interesting.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 13, 2013, 12:13:45 PM
That's not a bad idea.  Now, where's that suggestion box??  ;)

Choy for Pope!!  ;D  Uh oh...wait a minute...

Hey, I still have Catholic baptismal records ;)

Ooohhh, if that were to happen I don't know what I'll do first.  Abolish the Tridentine Mass and replace it with the Divine Liturgy?  Reinstate infant Communion and Confirmation?  I KNOW!  Anathemize the SSPX!  :D :D :D

I'll keep Pastor Aeternus until I'm done 'doxing Rome ;)
We would have an epic battle over the Tridentine Mass. There would probably be light sabers invovled. I'm almost certain that yours would be red.

You will be 'doxed.  Resistance is futile.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Ivanov on March 13, 2013, 12:31:27 PM
Thank you Michael,

I meant for this to appear in the already established forum "Christian News", and then the in the thread "Conclave and a new Pope". I wasn't attempting to start a new thread. Apparently I did something wrong. Perhaps if I had posted my original, lengthier reply your 4-point query would have been unnecessary. I appreciate your attentiveness to this. Given the initial difficulties, I think it best that you please not post my reply and follow-ups. I would ask that you help in that regard.

Again, I appreciate your helpfulness! If this particular thread had been a real-time conversation in the normal sense, I would have begun to speak as an ex-Romanist now Orthodox, and then, closed my mouth and let the silence that followed express my reply more poignantly. This was the "sense" of my post.

Forgive me.

Theophan
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: mike on March 13, 2013, 12:33:31 PM
Merged ^
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Monk Vasyl on March 13, 2013, 12:41:07 PM
I was just checking a live feed for the sign of smoke at:  http://www.nbcnews.com/video/nbcnews.com/51133846/#51133846 (http://www.nbcnews.com/video/nbcnews.com/51133846/#51133846)
and low and behold there's a seagull sitting on top of the chimney...lol
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 13, 2013, 12:48:26 PM
I was just checking a live feed for the sign of smoke at:  http://www.nbcnews.com/video/nbcnews.com/51133846/#51133846 (http://www.nbcnews.com/video/nbcnews.com/51133846/#51133846)
and low and behold there's a seagull sitting on top of the chimney...lol

Okay, the seagull has now been deposed by a larger seagull.  Let us discuss the theological symbolism of this.


 ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Monk Vasyl on March 13, 2013, 12:49:27 PM
I was just checking a live feed for the sign of smoke at:  http://www.nbcnews.com/video/nbcnews.com/51133846/#51133846 (http://www.nbcnews.com/video/nbcnews.com/51133846/#51133846)
and low and behold there's a seagull sitting on top of the chimney...lol

Okay, the seagull has now been deposed by a larger seagull.  Let us discuss the theological symbolism of this.


 ;D ;D ;D

If it was dove we could say it was the Holy Spirit.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: podkarpatska on March 13, 2013, 12:54:46 PM
The seagull now has several Twitter accounts:  St. Seagull: "Spending my days hanging at the Sistine Chapel. Bringing you behind the scenes updates from the chimney. "  

https://twitter.com/intent/userscreen_name=SaintSeagull&tw_i=311877626803412993&tw_p=tweetembed
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Hiwot on March 13, 2013, 12:55:09 PM
what Hugo( my all time favorite author in my all time favorite book  :)  ) says here, is found in all places where the power of money and authority reside. so I hope its understood what he is criticizing... during events such as this I think of the hearts that will break, those who might say ' I am not worthy' but really are fighting tooth and nail to get what they claim to be unworthy of.. I guess those who know what I am talking about know.. but just in case some get it mixed up, this is not in criticism of the Roman Church.. but a reflection on the human condition.

Quote
A bishop is almost always surrounded by a full squadron of little abbes, just as a general is by a covey of young officers. This is what that charming Saint Francois de Sales calls somewhere "les pretres blancs-becs," callow priests. Every career has its aspirants, who form a train for those who have attained eminence in it. There is no power which has not its dependents. There is no fortune which has not its court. The seekers of the future eddy around the splendid present. Every metropolis has its staff of officials. Every bishop who possesses the least influence has about him his patrol of cherubim from the seminary, which goes the round, and maintains good order in the episcopal palace, and mounts guard over monseigneur's smile. To please a bishop is equivalent to getting one's foot in the stirrup for a sub-diaconate. It is necessary to walk one's path discreetly; the apostleship does not disdain the canonship.
Just as there are bigwigs elsewhere, there are big mitres in the Church. These are the bishops who stand well at Court, who are rich, well endowed, skilful, accepted by the world, who know how to pray, no doubt, but who know also how to beg, who feel little scruple at making a whole diocese dance attendance in their person, who are connecting links between the sacristy and diplomacy, who are abbes rather than priests, prelates rather than bishops. Happy those who approach them! Being persons of influence, they create a shower about them, upon the assiduous and the favored, and upon all the young men who understand the art of pleasing, of large parishes, prebends, archidiaconates, chaplaincies, and cathedral posts, while awaiting episcopal honors. As they advance themselves, they cause their satellites to progress also; it is a whole solar system on the march. Their radiance casts a gleam of purple over their suite. Their prosperity is crumbled up behind the scenes, into nice little promotions. The larger the diocese of the patron, the fatter the curacy for the favorite. And then, there is Rome. A bishop who understands how to become an archbishop, an archbishop who knows how to become a cardinal, carries you with him as conclavist; you enter a court of papal jurisdiction, you receive the pallium, and behold! you are an auditor, then a papal chamberlain, then monsignor, and from a Grace to an Eminence is only a step, and between the Eminence and the Holiness there is but the smoke of a ballot. Every skull-cap may dream of the tiara. The priest is nowadays the only man who can become a king in a regular manner; and what a king! the supreme king. Then what a nursery of aspirations is a seminary! How many blushing choristers, how many youthful abbes bear on their heads Perrette's pot of milk! Who knows how easy it is for ambition to call itself vocation? in good faith, perchance, and deceiving itself, devotee that it is.

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/135/135-h/135-h.htm

Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 13, 2013, 01:01:39 PM
This seagull must be a Catholic, or perhaps an Orthodox spy.

He knows a nice smooth place to land, but he's smart and will lift off when the heat builds up.

http://metro.co.uk/2013/03/12/papal-conclave-live-blog-will-it-be-white-smoke-or-not-3537372/
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Benjamin the Red on March 13, 2013, 01:26:54 PM
They seem to have moved on, except for one walking around on the roof.

The Twitter accounts appear to have been deleted.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 13, 2013, 01:34:30 PM
They seem to have moved on, except for one walking around on the roof.

The Twitter accounts appear to have been deleted.

"They" is vague.  :laugh:

Are the news media walking around on the roof? Or the seagulls?

I like the latest post:
Quote
Things Christmas and today have in common:

1. Chimneys.
2. An elderly man.
3. No smoke.

http://metro.co.uk/2013/03/12/papal-conclave-live-blog-will-it-be-white-smoke-or-not-3537372/
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 13, 2013, 01:38:05 PM
what Hugo( my all time favorite author in my all time favorite book  :)  ) says here, is found in all places where the power of money and authority reside. so I hope its understood what he is criticizing... during events such as this I think of the hearts that will break, those who might say ' I am not worthy' but really are fighting tooth and nail to get what they claim to be unworthy of.. I guess those who know what I am talking about know.. but just in case some get it mixed up, this is not in criticism of the Roman Church.. but a reflection on the human condition.

Quote
A bishop is almost always surrounded by a full squadron of little abbes, just as a general is by a covey of young officers. This is what that charming Saint Francois de Sales calls somewhere "les pretres blancs-becs," callow priests. Every career has its aspirants, who form a train for those who have attained eminence in it. There is no power which has not its dependents. There is no fortune which has not its court. The seekers of the future eddy around the splendid present. Every metropolis has its staff of officials. Every bishop who possesses the least influence has about him his patrol of cherubim from the seminary, which goes the round, and maintains good order in the episcopal palace, and mounts guard over monseigneur's smile. To please a bishop is equivalent to getting one's foot in the stirrup for a sub-diaconate. It is necessary to walk one's path discreetly; the apostleship does not disdain the canonship.
Just as there are bigwigs elsewhere, there are big mitres in the Church. These are the bishops who stand well at Court, who are rich, well endowed, skilful, accepted by the world, who know how to pray, no doubt, but who know also how to beg, who feel little scruple at making a whole diocese dance attendance in their person, who are connecting links between the sacristy and diplomacy, who are abbes rather than priests, prelates rather than bishops. Happy those who approach them! Being persons of influence, they create a shower about them, upon the assiduous and the favored, and upon all the young men who understand the art of pleasing, of large parishes, prebends, archidiaconates, chaplaincies, and cathedral posts, while awaiting episcopal honors. As they advance themselves, they cause their satellites to progress also; it is a whole solar system on the march. Their radiance casts a gleam of purple over their suite. Their prosperity is crumbled up behind the scenes, into nice little promotions. The larger the diocese of the patron, the fatter the curacy for the favorite. And then, there is Rome. A bishop who understands how to become an archbishop, an archbishop who knows how to become a cardinal, carries you with him as conclavist; you enter a court of papal jurisdiction, you receive the pallium, and behold! you are an auditor, then a papal chamberlain, then monsignor, and from a Grace to an Eminence is only a step, and between the Eminence and the Holiness there is but the smoke of a ballot. Every skull-cap may dream of the tiara. The priest is nowadays the only man who can become a king in a regular manner; and what a king! the supreme king. Then what a nursery of aspirations is a seminary! How many blushing choristers, how many youthful abbes bear on their heads Perrette's pot of milk! Who knows how easy it is for ambition to call itself vocation? in good faith, perchance, and deceiving itself, devotee that it is.

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/135/135-h/135-h.htm



Great quote, Hiwot!  As I read it in the light that you presented it, I couldn't help but think how appropriate it is, not only for Rome, but, as a reflection on the human condition, for the state of the Orthodox Church in America (and other places) as well, with all its seemingly endless "jurisdictional" issues.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Benjamin the Red on March 13, 2013, 01:38:58 PM
They seem to have moved on, except for one walking around on the roof.

The Twitter accounts appear to have been deleted.

"They" is vague.  :laugh:

Are the news media walking around on the roof? Or the seagulls?


I'll never tell... :angel:
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 13, 2013, 01:39:26 PM
They seem to have moved on, except for one walking around on the roof.

The Twitter accounts appear to have been deleted.

"They" is vague.  :laugh:

Are the news media walking around on the roof? Or the seagulls?

I like the latest post:
Quote
Things Christmas and today have in common:

1. Chimneys.
2. An elderly man.
3. No smoke.

http://metro.co.uk/2013/03/12/papal-conclave-live-blog-will-it-be-white-smoke-or-not-3537372/


You mean the news media are NOT seagulls?  With all the crap they deposit randomly all over the place?  ;D
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 13, 2013, 01:40:55 PM
They seem to have moved on, except for one walking around on the roof.

The Twitter accounts appear to have been deleted.

"They" is vague.  :laugh:

Are the news media walking around on the roof? Or the seagulls?


I'll never tell... :angel:


Oh, the suspense builds. People are so desperate. Perhaps "they" will bribe the seagull to tell all or put a recorder on one.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 13, 2013, 01:43:00 PM
They seem to have moved on, except for one walking around on the roof.

The Twitter accounts appear to have been deleted.

"They" is vague.  :laugh:

Are the news media walking around on the roof? Or the seagulls?

I like the latest post:
Quote
Things Christmas and today have in common:

1. Chimneys.
2. An elderly man.
3. No smoke.

http://metro.co.uk/2013/03/12/papal-conclave-live-blog-will-it-be-white-smoke-or-not-3537372/


You mean the news media are NOT seagulls?  With all the crap they deposit randomly all over the place?  ;D

And all the garbage they dig up.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 13, 2013, 01:44:55 PM
They seem to have moved on, except for one walking around on the roof.

The Twitter accounts appear to have been deleted.

"They" is vague.  :laugh:

Are the news media walking around on the roof? Or the seagulls?

I like the latest post:
Quote
Things Christmas and today have in common:

1. Chimneys.
2. An elderly man.
3. No smoke.

http://metro.co.uk/2013/03/12/papal-conclave-live-blog-will-it-be-white-smoke-or-not-3537372/


You mean the news media are NOT seagulls?  With all the crap they deposit randomly all over the place?  ;D

And all the garbage they dig up.

Priceless.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Hiwot on March 13, 2013, 02:00:52 PM
what Hugo( my all time favorite author in my all time favorite book  :)  ) says here, is found in all places where the power of money and authority reside. so I hope its understood what he is criticizing... during events such as this I think of the hearts that will break, those who might say ' I am not worthy' but really are fighting tooth and nail to get what they claim to be unworthy of.. I guess those who know what I am talking about know.. but just in case some get it mixed up, this is not in criticism of the Roman Church.. but a reflection on the human condition.

Quote
A bishop is almost always surrounded by a full squadron of little abbes, just as a general is by a covey of young officers. This is what that charming Saint Francois de Sales calls somewhere "les pretres blancs-becs," callow priests. Every career has its aspirants, who form a train for those who have attained eminence in it. There is no power which has not its dependents. There is no fortune which has not its court. The seekers of the future eddy around the splendid present. Every metropolis has its staff of officials. Every bishop who possesses the least influence has about him his patrol of cherubim from the seminary, which goes the round, and maintains good order in the episcopal palace, and mounts guard over monseigneur's smile. To please a bishop is equivalent to getting one's foot in the stirrup for a sub-diaconate. It is necessary to walk one's path discreetly; the apostleship does not disdain the canonship.
Just as there are bigwigs elsewhere, there are big mitres in the Church. These are the bishops who stand well at Court, who are rich, well endowed, skilful, accepted by the world, who know how to pray, no doubt, but who know also how to beg, who feel little scruple at making a whole diocese dance attendance in their person, who are connecting links between the sacristy and diplomacy, who are abbes rather than priests, prelates rather than bishops. Happy those who approach them! Being persons of influence, they create a shower about them, upon the assiduous and the favored, and upon all the young men who understand the art of pleasing, of large parishes, prebends, archidiaconates, chaplaincies, and cathedral posts, while awaiting episcopal honors. As they advance themselves, they cause their satellites to progress also; it is a whole solar system on the march. Their radiance casts a gleam of purple over their suite. Their prosperity is crumbled up behind the scenes, into nice little promotions. The larger the diocese of the patron, the fatter the curacy for the favorite. And then, there is Rome. A bishop who understands how to become an archbishop, an archbishop who knows how to become a cardinal, carries you with him as conclavist; you enter a court of papal jurisdiction, you receive the pallium, and behold! you are an auditor, then a papal chamberlain, then monsignor, and from a Grace to an Eminence is only a step, and between the Eminence and the Holiness there is but the smoke of a ballot. Every skull-cap may dream of the tiara. The priest is nowadays the only man who can become a king in a regular manner; and what a king! the supreme king. Then what a nursery of aspirations is a seminary! How many blushing choristers, how many youthful abbes bear on their heads Perrette's pot of milk! Who knows how easy it is for ambition to call itself vocation? in good faith, perchance, and deceiving itself, devotee that it is.

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/135/135-h/135-h.htm



Great quote, Hiwot!  As I read it in the light that you presented it, I couldn't help but think how appropriate it is, not only for Rome, but, as a reflection on the human condition, for the state of the Orthodox Church in America (and other places) as well, with all its seemingly endless "jurisdictional" issues.

Indeed. you got it JM.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 13, 2013, 02:03:03 PM
New Pope. White Smoke & Bells
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Basil 320 on March 13, 2013, 02:04:47 PM
"White smoke" billowing from the Sistine Chapel; bells are ringing!
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 13, 2013, 02:05:10 PM
The seagull now has several Twitter accounts:  St. Seagull: "Spending my days hanging at the Sistine Chapel. Bringing you behind the scenes updates from the chimney. "  

https://twitter.com/intent/userscreen_name=SaintSeagull&tw_i=311877626803412993&tw_p=tweetembed
hopefully it is not dropping something off  :o
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 13, 2013, 02:05:10 PM
Oh geesh, the suspense is killing me. LOL
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Monk Vasyl on March 13, 2013, 02:05:38 PM
Habemus Papam!
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Benjamin the Red on March 13, 2013, 02:06:38 PM
White Smoke! We have a Pope!

Habemus Papam!
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: LizaSymonenko on March 13, 2013, 02:06:58 PM
I got the "alert" on my cellphone....but, can't find the news anywhere.

Who is it?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: podkarpatska on March 13, 2013, 02:07:43 PM
Habent Papa. Multos Annis! Many Years! I pray that "axios" is in order.

(I apologize for my Android spell check. It changed axios to another word and I failed to proof it. No offense was meant.)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Ansgar on March 13, 2013, 02:11:17 PM
Habent Papa. Multos Annis! Many Years! I pray that "axios" is in order.

(I apologize for my Android spell check. It changed axios to another word and I failed to proof it. No offense was meant.)

No fair! I was supposed to say that.  ;D
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Monk Vasyl on March 13, 2013, 02:12:19 PM
Will it be an African or Cardinal O'Malley?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: mike on March 13, 2013, 02:13:44 PM
White Smoke! We have a Pope!

Habemus Papam!

We?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Monk Vasyl on March 13, 2013, 02:14:06 PM
I got the "alert" on my cellphone....but, can't find the news anywhere.

Who is it?

Never got my alert.  I hope its Cardinal O'Malley.

Ha, I finally got my alert.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 13, 2013, 02:14:44 PM
Habemus Papam!
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 13, 2013, 02:14:44 PM
White Smoke! We have a Pope!

Habemus Papam!
Yes, for going on 9 years now
(http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/871/217/400/TheodorosII.jpg)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 13, 2013, 02:14:44 PM
Will it be an African or Cardinal O'Malley?

Given that it happened so quickly I bet it's either Cardinal Scola or Cardinal Ouellet
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 13, 2013, 02:15:05 PM
White Smoke! We have a Pope!

Habemus Papam!

We?

We.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Adela on March 13, 2013, 02:19:43 PM
May God Bless all Roman Catholics on their happy news, and may God grant the new Pope much wisdom and strength to deal with the difficult issues dividing Roman Catholics from Orthodox Christians.


(Wow, this is more fun than watching the ball drop on New Year's Eve!)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 13, 2013, 02:20:11 PM
White Smoke! We have a Pope!

Habemus Papam!

We?

We.
Oui Oui
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Monk Vasyl on March 13, 2013, 02:21:49 PM
May God Bless all Roman Catholics on their happy news, and may God grant the new Pope much wisdom and strength to deal with the difficult issues dividing Roman Catholics from Orthodox Christians.


(Wow, this is more fun than watching the ball drop on New Year's Eve!)

AMEN!  AXIOS!
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Timon on March 13, 2013, 02:23:47 PM
Not that its happening, but would a Byzantine/Eastern Catholic Pope help or hurt the overall East/West relations?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Asteriktos on March 13, 2013, 02:31:55 PM
Not that its happening, but would a Byzantine/Eastern Catholic Pope help or hurt the overall East/West relations?

Definitely hurt. Most Catholics on the ground are already deluded about how close EOy and RCism is, and such an event would just push them further into delusion, not to mention giving fuel to the anti-Catholic conspiracy theory dreams of a small minority of Orthodox.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 13, 2013, 02:32:44 PM
May God Bless all Roman Catholics on their happy news, and may God grant the new Pope much wisdom and strength to deal with the difficult issues dividing Roman Catholics from Orthodox Christians.


(Wow, this is more fun than watching the ball drop on New Year's Eve!)
Indeed. And of more importance.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 13, 2013, 02:32:44 PM
Not that its happening, but would a Byzantine/Eastern Catholic Pope help or hurt the overall East/West relations?
I think it could hurt, because he would have to latinize himself immediately. That's probably not a good thing.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 13, 2013, 02:32:54 PM
Not that its happening, but would a Byzantine/Eastern Catholic Pope help or hurt the overall East/West relations?
Depends on which "sui juris" he came from, ranging from Melchite (the best) to the UGCC (worst).
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: primuspilus on March 13, 2013, 02:33:26 PM
Quote
Not that its happening, but would a Byzantine/Eastern Catholic Pope
Unfortunately, that will never happen....ever.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Timon on March 13, 2013, 02:34:17 PM
Not that its happening, but would a Byzantine/Eastern Catholic Pope help or hurt the overall East/West relations?

Definitely hurt. Most Catholics on the ground are already deluded about how close EOy and RCism is, and such an event would just push them further into delusion, not to mention giving fuel to the anti-Catholic conspiracy theory dreams of a small minority of Orthodox.

Thats what I was thinking. On the surface, it seems nice. But it would definitely reduce the differences between us.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: mike on March 13, 2013, 02:34:53 PM
Not that its happening, but would a Byzantine/Eastern Catholic Pope help or hurt the overall East/West relations?
Depends on which "sui juris" he came from, ranging from Melchite (the best) to the UGCC (worst).

IMO Maronite would be most favoured.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Basil 320 on March 13, 2013, 02:36:47 PM
Just "White Smoke" and ringing bells so far; no announcement, yet.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Adela on March 13, 2013, 02:40:04 PM
The commentators on EWTN's live streaming coverage said they think we'll know in about 10 minutes.....  So far the shots of the crowds show lots and lots of very happy Roman Catholics.  :-)  
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 13, 2013, 02:42:25 PM
Not that its happening, but would a Byzantine/Eastern Catholic Pope help or hurt the overall East/West relations?
I think it could hurt, because he would have to latinize himself immediately. That's probably not a good thing.
Oh?  You know that the first Latin Archbishop of Rome, St. Victor, did not come until c. 188, and the see wasn't fully Latinized until Pontiff Damasus c. 380.

Who would tell His Holiness that he would have to Latinize?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 13, 2013, 02:42:25 PM
Not that its happening, but would a Byzantine/Eastern Catholic Pope help or hurt the overall East/West relations?
Depends on which "sui juris" he came from, ranging from Melchite (the best) to the UGCC (worst).

IMO Maronite would be most favoured.
Favored by whom?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 13, 2013, 02:42:25 PM
The commentators on EWTN's live streaming coverage said they think we'll know in about 10 minutes.....  So far the shots of the crowds show lots and lots of very happy Roman Catholics.  :-)  
We are easy to please. A few bells, a few smells, and news of a new Pope.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: mike on March 13, 2013, 02:42:55 PM
Favored by whom?

Russians, for example.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: biro on March 13, 2013, 02:49:01 PM
Lord protect him!
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Timon on March 13, 2013, 02:51:27 PM
What if Hillary Clinton walked out on that balcony....
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Alpo on March 13, 2013, 02:51:32 PM
Not that its happening, but would a Byzantine/Eastern Catholic Pope help or hurt the overall East/West relations?
Depends on which "sui juris" he came from, ranging from Melchite (the best) to the UGCC (worst).

Care to elaborate?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Cantor Krishnich on March 13, 2013, 02:55:23 PM
What if Hillary Clinton walked out on that balcony....

The Swiss Guard would remove her...
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Adela on March 13, 2013, 03:01:27 PM
The lights came on in the balcony area........
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Clemente on March 13, 2013, 03:02:14 PM
Habetis Papa.

May he return Rome to its rightful place amongst the Apostolic sees.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: LizaSymonenko on March 13, 2013, 03:04:33 PM
Favored by whom?

Russians, for example.

Why?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Clemente on March 13, 2013, 03:09:38 PM
Cardenal Bergoglio
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Adela on March 13, 2013, 03:10:48 PM
will take the name Pope Francis..... he is a Jesuit....  The first Jesuit pope, first Latin American Pope....
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Basil 320 on March 13, 2013, 03:12:04 PM
"Many Years!"
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: biro on March 13, 2013, 03:15:42 PM
Thanks be to God!!  :angel:
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: podkarpatska on March 13, 2013, 03:17:57 PM
From what we know of Pope Francisco I:  He lives a simple, monastic-like life, a Jesuit, and who used public transportation in Argentina. Axios!  Multos Annos!  Muchos años!  Don't know about him and the east.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Timon on March 13, 2013, 03:19:28 PM
The Orthodox do recognize this election, right? Even though we arent in communion, don't we still recognize him officially as the Bishop of Rome?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 13, 2013, 03:20:37 PM
will take the name Pope Francis..... he is a Jesuit....  The first Jesuit pope, first Latin American Pope....

Mnóhaja l’íta, bláhaja l’íta,
mnóhaja, bláhaja l’íta.
Vo zdraviji i spaseniji, mnóhaja,
bláhaja l’íta.

(Apologies for any inaccuracies in the translation!)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: LizaSymonenko on March 13, 2013, 03:23:43 PM

So, this will be interesting.

Apparently Pope Francis is good friends with  Patriarch Svyatoslav of UGCC.

Now, I see why Russia might have an issue.  ;)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: podkarpatska on March 13, 2013, 03:25:04 PM
Pope Francis I and Patriarch Bartholomew I both at the same time. With all of available names of Saints, I wonder when the last time both were the first to use a name and hold office at the same time?  No significance, just trivia.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: mike on March 13, 2013, 03:25:33 PM
don't we still recognize him officially as the Bishop of Rome?

Nah. We are sedevacantists.

Favored by whom?

Russians, for example.

Why?

They like him more, than the Byzantine ones.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 13, 2013, 03:26:21 PM
Being Catholic is so awesome.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 13, 2013, 03:26:21 PM
Not that its happening, but would a Byzantine/Eastern Catholic Pope help or hurt the overall East/West relations?
Depends on which "sui juris" he came from, ranging from Melchite (the best) to the UGCC (worst).

Care to elaborate?
Melkites and Antiochian Orthodox have the best relations of all the Vatican caused schisms.  Many Antiochians don't look at the Melkites as different, will (unofficially) allow intercommunion (almost officially), etc.  The Melkites insist on many the same conditions we do for reunion, and would work not only for that but for the Orthodox in general, in Antioch and elsewhere, as well.

The UGCC has horrible relations with the canonical Orthodox Church in its jurisdiction, revels in provocative moves not only to the Orthodox but to the Vatican as well, considers the Orthodox in its homeland as interlopers-although the UGCC is the interloppers, as elsewhere, excels as second to none in sanctimony on Orthodox-Vatican relations, etc.  It's focus would be solely on finishing the work of Brest, not even of Florence.

LOL.  They elected a Jesuit.
Quote
The sound principles of Catholicism, however, were maintained and propagated by the Jesuits who, suppressed by the Holy See and exiled from the Catholic nations, found an asylum and the centre of their future revival in Russia. In 1779 Catharine II invited the Jesuits to exercise their ministry in White Russia, and in 1786 they had in Russia six colleges and 178 members. Their number increased so much that Pius VII re-established their order for Russia, where it returned to life under Father Gruber. In 1801 the society had 262 members, and 347 in 1811. The Jesuits retained a lively gratitude for the hospitality that they had received in Russia, and worked with zeal to convert it to Catholicism.
Nihil Obstat. February 1, 1912. Remy Lafort, D.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13253a.htm

Congratulations Papist on your fellow Latino.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 13, 2013, 03:26:31 PM
The Orthodox do recognize this election, right? Even though we arent in communion, don't we still recognize him officially as the Bishop of Rome?
Bishop of Rome for the Vatican.  Like the Archbishop of Canterbury for the Anglicans.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: podkarpatska on March 13, 2013, 03:27:08 PM
Probably he is a place holder given his age. I was hoping for Cardinal O'Malley....he has a beard!
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 13, 2013, 03:27:45 PM
Being Catholic is so awesome.

Yes, indeed, it is!!!!! ;)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 13, 2013, 03:28:37 PM
Probably he is a place holder given his age. I was hoping for Cardinal O'Malley....he has a beard!

You may get your wish...just not now.  ;)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: podkarpatska on March 13, 2013, 03:33:10 PM
Not that its happening, but would a Byzantine/Eastern Catholic Pope help or hurt the overall East/West relations?
Depends on which "sui juris" he came from, ranging from Melchite (the best) to the UGCC (worst).

Care to elaborate?
Melkites and Antiochian Orthodox have the best relations of all the Vatican caused schisms.  Many Antiochians don't look at the Melkites as different, will (unofficially) allow intercommunion (almost officially), etc.  The Melkites insist on many the same conditions we do for reunion, and would work not only for that but for the Orthodox in general, in Antioch and elsewhere, as well.

The UGCC has horrible relations with the canonical Orthodox Church in its jurisdiction, revels in provocative moves not only to the Orthodox but to the Vatican as well, considers the Orthodox in its homeland as interlopers-although the UGCC is the interloppers, as elsewhere, excels as second to none in sanctimony on Orthodox-Vatican relations, etc.  It's focus would be solely on finishing the work of Brest, not even of Florence.

LOL.  They elected a Jesuit.
Quote
The sound principles of Catholicism, however, were maintained and propagated by the Jesuits who, suppressed by the Holy See and exiled from the Catholic nations, found an asylum and the centre of their future revival in Russia. In 1779 Catharine II invited the Jesuits to exercise their ministry in White Russia, and in 1786 they had in Russia six colleges and 178 members. Their number increased so much that Pius VII re-established their order for Russia, where it returned to life under Father Gruber. In 1801 the society had 262 members, and 347 in 1811. The Jesuits retained a lively gratitude for the hospitality that they had received in Russia, and worked with zeal to convert it to Catholicism.
Nihil Obstat. February 1, 1912. Remy Lafort, D.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13253a.htm

Congratulations Papist on your fellow Latino.

Being Pope is likely transformative. We shall see if he values continuing the years of warm relations with the EP and Pope Benedict's slow, but steady building of relationships with the MP over the UGCC. I suspect the Greek Catholics of Muchachevo are concerned for their relative independence from L'vov.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 13, 2013, 03:36:28 PM

So, this will be interesting.

Apparently Pope Francis is good friends with  Patriarch Svyatoslav of UGCC.

Now, I see why Russia might have an issue.  ;)
Your piece starts:
Quote
The Union of Brest (1596) was an answer to Christ's legacy that there will be only "One flock and and shepherd" (Jn. 10:16). This was the main reason why the Ukrainian and Belorussian bishops of the Kievan Metropolitanate decided to become united with the Apostolic See of Rome...
and ends
Quote
Today the modern Moscow hierarchs, just as their predecessors in czarist Russia, officially proclaim that "in Soviet Union the Ukrainian Uniate Church does not and cannot exist!" The fear of the Church union in Russian circles is still great even to this day. This only demonstrates that the union with Rome must be and in fact is of great importance to the promotion of the Ukrainian cause. And the recent developments in Western Ukraine eloquently support this proposition*.
* Editor's Note: The Greek Catholic Church in Ukraine regained its freedom after the fall of Comunism and the subsequent independence of Ukraine, in 1990-1991.
The only link between starting with ultramontanist theology and ending with Ukrainian nationalism is the propoganda of the UGCC. Reminds me of a Ukrainian who recounted being told in US school (public, IIRC) by her teacher (UGCC member) "No, there are no Orthodox in Ukraine. The Russians were Orthodox but they are all atheist now (this was pre1989), the Ukrainians are all catholic."  If the bishops who signed Brest did so because of some epiphany they had about the supreme pontif in the Vatican, the opening sentence might have something to it.  Alas, even reading between the lines in the article one sees such was not the case: other concerns impelled their signatures (including, but not limited to, state sponsered violence and force). The meandering, tortured exegeisis employed to make Matthew 16 the basis of the "Ukrainian cause raises questions throughout on accuracy.

As I first noted, the use of the name "Ukrainians/Ukraine/Ukrainian (language)" throughout (as in the opening) dates his conclusions throughout as anachronisms. And anachronism make poor history.

I could swear that story was recounted here somewhere.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: TheMathematician on March 13, 2013, 03:38:58 PM
Hey look, an american pope.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 13, 2013, 03:41:32 PM
Hey look, an american pope.

 ;)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Hiwot on March 13, 2013, 03:43:42 PM
A very interesting and admirable man. May the Lord grant him many years. Congratulations to all our RC brethren. :)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 13, 2013, 03:45:19 PM
Not that its happening, but would a Byzantine/Eastern Catholic Pope help or hurt the overall East/West relations?
Depends on which "sui juris" he came from, ranging from Melchite (the best) to the UGCC (worst).

Care to elaborate?
Melkites and Antiochian Orthodox have the best relations of all the Vatican caused schisms.  Many Antiochians don't look at the Melkites as different, will (unofficially) allow intercommunion (almost officially), etc.  The Melkites insist on many the same conditions we do for reunion, and would work not only for that but for the Orthodox in general, in Antioch and elsewhere, as well.

The UGCC has horrible relations with the canonical Orthodox Church in its jurisdiction, revels in provocative moves not only to the Orthodox but to the Vatican as well, considers the Orthodox in its homeland as interlopers-although the UGCC is the interloppers, as elsewhere, excels as second to none in sanctimony on Orthodox-Vatican relations, etc.  It's focus would be solely on finishing the work of Brest, not even of Florence.

LOL.  They elected a Jesuit.
Quote
The sound principles of Catholicism, however, were maintained and propagated by the Jesuits who, suppressed by the Holy See and exiled from the Catholic nations, found an asylum and the centre of their future revival in Russia. In 1779 Catharine II invited the Jesuits to exercise their ministry in White Russia, and in 1786 they had in Russia six colleges and 178 members. Their number increased so much that Pius VII re-established their order for Russia, where it returned to life under Father Gruber. In 1801 the society had 262 members, and 347 in 1811. The Jesuits retained a lively gratitude for the hospitality that they had received in Russia, and worked with zeal to convert it to Catholicism.
Nihil Obstat. February 1, 1912. Remy Lafort, D.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13253a.htm

Congratulations Papist on your fellow Latino.

Being Pope is likely transformative. We shall see if he values continuing the years of warm relations with the EP and Pope Benedict's slow, but steady building of relationships with the MP over the UGCC. I suspect the Greek Catholics of Muchachevo are concerned for their relative independence from L'vov.
for any particular reason now?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 13, 2013, 03:45:19 PM
Being Catholic is so awesome.

Yes, indeed, it is!!!!! ;)
Yes, indeed, it is!!!!  :D
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Suryoyutho on March 13, 2013, 03:45:58 PM
Do we know if he is traditional? I see some Jesuit-liberal links when reading a bit about them.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: podkarpatska on March 13, 2013, 03:46:38 PM
I have been searching for info about the be we Pope and the Orthodox.

This from an interview with His Grace Bishop John of Caracas (ROCOR):

"What kind of relationship do you have with other Christian confessions, especially Catholics?

- I would characterize these relations as neighborly. I met the Catholic Archbishop of Buenos Aires, Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio. This is a very humble, kind person. (During the most recent conclave, he was one of the legitimate candidates for the papal throne.) When we began to have problems with the schismatics (the breakaway from ROCOR faction), Cardinal Bergoglio, on his own initiative, wrote a letter in our support to the government."  

http://www.synod.com/synod/engdocuments/enart_bpjohnsadiocese.html
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Fr. George on March 13, 2013, 03:47:43 PM
Do we know if he is traditional? I see some Jesuit-liberal links when reading a bit about them.

Pundits say yes, he is.  Traditional, conservative, humble, prayerful, with a lot of administrative experience (not just bishop for his own people, but also looking after EC's, dean of seminary, Cardinal Priest before election as bishop, etc.).  Time will tell if this will translate into a "conservative" and/or "traditional" papacy.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: LizaSymonenko on March 13, 2013, 03:48:12 PM

So, this will be interesting.

Apparently Pope Francis is good friends with  Patriarch Svyatoslav of UGCC.

Now, I see why Russia might have an issue.  ;)
Your piece starts:
Quote
The Union of Brest (1596) was an answer to Christ's legacy that there will be only "One flock and and shepherd" (Jn. 10:16). This was the main reason why the Ukrainian and Belorussian bishops of the Kievan Metropolitanate decided to become united with the Apostolic See of Rome...
and ends
Quote
Today the modern Moscow hierarchs, just as their predecessors in czarist Russia, officially proclaim that "in Soviet Union the Ukrainian Uniate Church does not and cannot exist!" The fear of the Church union in Russian circles is still great even to this day. This only demonstrates that the union with Rome must be and in fact is of great importance to the promotion of the Ukrainian cause. And the recent developments in Western Ukraine eloquently support this proposition*.
* Editor's Note: The Greek Catholic Church in Ukraine regained its freedom after the fall of Comunism and the subsequent independence of Ukraine, in 1990-1991.
The only link between starting with ultramontanist theology and ending with Ukrainian nationalism is the propoganda of the UGCC. Reminds me of a Ukrainian who recounted being told in US school (public, IIRC) by her teacher (UGCC member) "No, there are no Orthodox in Ukraine. The Russians were Orthodox but they are all atheist now (this was pre1989), the Ukrainians are all catholic."  If the bishops who signed Brest did so because of some epiphany they had about the supreme pontif in the Vatican, the opening sentence might have something to it.  Alas, even reading between the lines in the article one sees such was not the case: other concerns impelled their signatures (including, but not limited to, state sponsered violence and force). The meandering, tortured exegeisis employed to make Matthew 16 the basis of the "Ukrainian cause raises questions throughout on accuracy.

As I first noted, the use of the name "Ukrainians/Ukraine/Ukrainian (language)" throughout (as in the opening) dates his conclusions throughout as anachronisms. And anachronism make poor history.

I could swear that story was recounted here somewhere.

Sorry...I hadn't read the previous pages.

This may turn out to be rather interesting.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Suryoyutho on March 13, 2013, 03:48:27 PM
Do we know if he is traditional? I see some Jesuit-liberal links when reading a bit about them.

Pundits say yes, he is.  Traditional, conservative, humble, prayerful, with a lot of administrative experience (not just bishop for his own people, but also looking after EC's, dean of seminary, Cardinal Priest before election as bishop, etc.).  Time will tell if this will translate into a "conservative" and/or "traditional" papacy.
Thank you, good to read. Congratulations!
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: podkarpatska on March 13, 2013, 03:49:08 PM
Not that its happening, but would a Byzantine/Eastern Catholic Pope help or hurt the overall East/West relations?
Depends on which "sui juris" he came from, ranging from Melchite (the best) to the UGCC (worst).

Care to elaborate?
Melkites and Antiochian Orthodox have the best relations of all the Vatican caused schisms.  Many Antiochians don't look at the Melkites as different, will (unofficially) allow intercommunion (almost officially), etc.  The Melkites insist on many the same conditions we do for reunion, and would work not only for that but for the Orthodox in general, in Antioch and elsewhere, as well.

The UGCC has horrible relations with the canonical Orthodox Church in its jurisdiction, revels in provocative moves not only to the Orthodox but to the Vatican as well, considers the Orthodox in its homeland as interlopers-although the UGCC is the interloppers, as elsewhere, excels as second to none in sanctimony on Orthodox-Vatican relations, etc.  It's focus would be solely on finishing the work of Brest, not even of Florence.

LOL.  They elected a Jesuit.
Quote
The sound principles of Catholicism, however, were maintained and propagated by the Jesuits who, suppressed by the Holy See and exiled from the Catholic nations, found an asylum and the centre of their future revival in Russia. In 1779 Catharine II invited the Jesuits to exercise their ministry in White Russia, and in 1786 they had in Russia six colleges and 178 members. Their number increased so much that Pius VII re-established their order for Russia, where it returned to life under Father Gruber. In 1801 the society had 262 members, and 347 in 1811. The Jesuits retained a lively gratitude for the hospitality that they had received in Russia, and worked with zeal to convert it to Catholicism.
Nihil Obstat. February 1, 1912. Remy Lafort, D.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13253a.htm

Congratulations Papist on your fellow Latino.

Being Pope is likely transformative. We shall see if he values continuing the years of warm relations with the EP and Pope Benedict's slow, but steady building of relationships with the MP over the UGCC. I suspect the Greek Catholics of Muchachevo are concerned for their relative independence from L'vov.
for any particular reason now?

They might fear the UGCC faction having his ear although the second in command at the Orientale Congregation is a Slovak/Rusyn eastern rite Jesuit Archbishop.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: serb1389 on March 13, 2013, 03:51:30 PM
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/03/13/174201655/a-pope-is-chosen

The world's 1.2 billion Roman Catholics have a new spiritual leader.

As afternoon turned to evening in Vatican City on Wednesday, a little after 7 p.m. local time, white smoke rose from a chimney above the Sistine Chapel and bells rang through St. Peter's Square — the traditional signals that the church's cardinals have chosen a new pope.

A little more than an hour later, his identity was announced. It is 76-year-old Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio of Buenos Aires, Argentina. He comes from a region of the world with 483 million Catholics — about 40 percent of all the church's faithful.

------------------------------

I thought this deserved its own thread
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) on March 13, 2013, 03:55:04 PM
Being Catholic is so awesome.

I am truly happy for you. You have been a loyal Roman Catholic through thick and thin, and I respect that.

That said, I would like wish many years to HH Francis I, who seems to be very simpatico. (BTW, I never truly understood the meaning of simpatico until I realized that it was present in each of the following: nice, decent, sympathetic, likeable, pleasant, agreeable, delightful, amiable and congenial.)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: John Larocque on March 13, 2013, 04:03:12 PM
From the Rorate Caeli archives:

http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2011/05/habemus-something.html

Quote
This doesn't anger me at all. On the contrary, such a petty and sick gesture points to the impotence of Cardinal Bergoglio, the runner-up in the last conclave and therefore the very exemplar of failures. He was the liberals' choice. He governs one of the chief sees in the Church. As a result, there is not even one approved Traditional Latin Mass in Buenos Aires. Not even one for millions of souls...

Bergoglio, on the other hand, is old. He is 74½. Tick, tock.

And for the Koran-kissing crowd:
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2006/06/receive-what.html
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Timon on March 13, 2013, 04:03:24 PM
They keep saying that that tradition goes all the way back almost 2000 years, to the time of St. Peter. Is that really true? The smoke and all?  Is their election process similar to ours?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 13, 2013, 04:08:26 PM
They keep saying that that tradition goes all the way back almost 2000 years, to the time of St. Peter. Is that really true? The smoke and all?  Is their election process similar to ours?

The smoke is a novelty.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: That person on March 13, 2013, 04:08:52 PM
Being Catholic is so awesome.
Enjoy this.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: mike on March 13, 2013, 04:09:40 PM
He was accused of denouncing priests and monks to Videla's forces.

They keep saying that that tradition goes all the way back almost 2000 years, to the time of St. Peter. Is that really true? The smoke and all?  

AFAIR, most of the procedures are from XVIIth or XVIIIth century

Quote
Is their election process similar to ours?

What do you mean by "ours"?

Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Timon on March 13, 2013, 04:10:54 PM


Quote
Is their election process similar to ours?

What do you mean by "ours"?



I mean the way we (Orthodox) elect Bishops.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Deacon Lance on March 13, 2013, 04:11:20 PM
From what we know of Pope Francisco I:  He lives a simple, monastic-like life, a Jesuit, and who used public transportation in Argentina. Axios!  Multos Annos!  Muchos años!  Don't know about him and the east.
He was ordinary for Eastern Catholics without their own bishop in Argentina.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: mike on March 13, 2013, 04:12:33 PM
I mean the way we (Orthodox) elect Bishops.

Each jurisdiction has different procedures. It also varies depending on the rank.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Schultz on March 13, 2013, 04:13:26 PM
He was accused of denouncing priests and monks to Videla's forces.

They keep saying that that tradition goes all the way back almost 2000 years, to the time of St. Peter. Is that really true? The smoke and all?  

AFAIR, most of the procedures are from XVIIth or XVIIIth century

Quote
Is their election process similar to ours?

What do you mean by "ours"?



Of which no such proof was, to my knowledge, ever offered.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 13, 2013, 04:14:12 PM
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/30/Conclave_2013_by_continent.svg)
(http://www.calledtocommunion.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Distribution_of_Catholics.png)
(http://static-l3.blogcritics.org/13/02/13/190699/map-world-cath2000-400x385.gif?t=20130213175623)
(http://www.prb.org/images2/DistributionCatholics.gif?w=509&h=224&as=1)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 13, 2013, 04:14:12 PM
Not that its happening, but would a Byzantine/Eastern Catholic Pope help or hurt the overall East/West relations?
Depends on which "sui juris" he came from, ranging from Melchite (the best) to the UGCC (worst).

Care to elaborate?
Melkites and Antiochian Orthodox have the best relations of all the Vatican caused schisms.  Many Antiochians don't look at the Melkites as different, will (unofficially) allow intercommunion (almost officially), etc.  The Melkites insist on many the same conditions we do for reunion, and would work not only for that but for the Orthodox in general, in Antioch and elsewhere, as well.

The UGCC has horrible relations with the canonical Orthodox Church in its jurisdiction, revels in provocative moves not only to the Orthodox but to the Vatican as well, considers the Orthodox in its homeland as interlopers-although the UGCC is the interloppers, as elsewhere, excels as second to none in sanctimony on Orthodox-Vatican relations, etc.  It's focus would be solely on finishing the work of Brest, not even of Florence.

LOL.  They elected a Jesuit.
Quote
The sound principles of Catholicism, however, were maintained and propagated by the Jesuits who, suppressed by the Holy See and exiled from the Catholic nations, found an asylum and the centre of their future revival in Russia. In 1779 Catharine II invited the Jesuits to exercise their ministry in White Russia, and in 1786 they had in Russia six colleges and 178 members. Their number increased so much that Pius VII re-established their order for Russia, where it returned to life under Father Gruber. In 1801 the society had 262 members, and 347 in 1811. The Jesuits retained a lively gratitude for the hospitality that they had received in Russia, and worked with zeal to convert it to Catholicism.
Nihil Obstat. February 1, 1912. Remy Lafort, D.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13253a.htm

Congratulations Papist on your fellow Latino.

Being Pope is likely transformative. We shall see if he values continuing the years of warm relations with the EP and Pope Benedict's slow, but steady building of relationships with the MP over the UGCC. I suspect the Greek Catholics of Muchachevo are concerned for their relative independence from L'vov.
for any particular reason now?

They might fear the UGCC faction having his ear although the second in command at the Orientale Congregation is a Slovak/Rusyn eastern rite Jesuit Archbishop.
You mean the Oriental rite Jesuits have a history? LOL
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Timon on March 13, 2013, 04:14:26 PM
I mean the way we (Orthodox) elect Bishops.

Each jurisdiction has different procedures. It also varies depending on the rank.

Gotcha. Excuse my ignorance. Still new to the Church and wasnt aware.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) on March 13, 2013, 04:22:32 PM
I want to post a number of views on the new Pope. This article from National Review may be a good start.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/342896/jesuit-named-francis-michael-potemra (http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/342896/jesuit-named-francis-michael-potemra)

Here is the author's conclusion: "The story here is that he is an outsider who is the consensus choice to fix what’s wrong with the church administration, but all in a Franciscan spirit of love and humility, to wipe the face of the church so that its inner beauty can radiate."
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ironchapman on March 13, 2013, 04:24:24 PM
That doesn't sound like Peter the Roman to me.

:P
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Eugenio on March 13, 2013, 04:25:35 PM
Interesting. The Wikipedia article on him says he was "Bishop of the Ordinariate for the Eastern Rites in Argentina" which means he is at least familiar with Catholicism's "Eastern Rite".
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 13, 2013, 04:28:21 PM
That doesn't sound like Peter the Roman to me.

:P

Maybe because his name isn't Peter and he's not from Rome?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: genesisone on March 13, 2013, 04:28:38 PM
What if Hillary Clinton walked out on that balcony....
Then she would be la Papa. (Yes, I speak Spanish  ;))
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ironchapman on March 13, 2013, 04:30:07 PM
That doesn't sound like Peter the Roman to me.

:P

Maybe because his name isn't Peter and he's not from Rome?

He's about as un-Peter* and un-Roman as you can get while still being a Catholic.

*=And by that I mean his names are George and Francis, and he was from an order started by a guy named Ignatius.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 13, 2013, 04:33:19 PM
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/03/13/174201655/a-pope-is-chosen

The world's 1.2 billion Roman Catholics have a new spiritual leader.

As afternoon turned to evening in Vatican City on Wednesday, a little after 7 p.m. local time, white smoke rose from a chimney above the Sistine Chapel and bells rang through St. Peter's Square — the traditional signals that the church's cardinals have chosen a new pope.

A little more than an hour later, his identity was announced. It is 76-year-old Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio of Buenos Aires, Argentina. He comes from a region of the world with 483 million Catholics — about 40 percent of all the church's faithful.

------------------------------

I thought this deserved its own thread
WHOOPS!!! :-[
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 13, 2013, 04:37:17 PM
That doesn't sound like Peter the Roman to me.

:P

Maybe because his name isn't Peter and he's not from Rome?

He's about as un-Peter* and un-Roman as you can get while still being a Catholic.

*=And by that I mean his names are George and Francis, and he was from an order started by a guy named Ignatius.

Hundreds of millions of Catholics do not have the name Peter, and are from a multitude of places other than Rome.  And yes, he's a Jesuit, many of whom are extremely "liberal" and many of whom are quite "conservative".  What, pray tell, is your point?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Alpo on March 13, 2013, 04:38:48 PM
I wonder if he has ever celebrated TLM after the Summorum Pontificum?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 13, 2013, 04:39:13 PM
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/03/13/174201655/a-pope-is-chosen

The world's 1.2 billion Roman Catholics have a new spiritual leader.

As afternoon turned to evening in Vatican City on Wednesday, a little after 7 p.m. local time, white smoke rose from a chimney above the Sistine Chapel and bells rang through St. Peter's Square — the traditional signals that the church's cardinals have chosen a new pope.

A little more than an hour later, his identity was announced. It is 76-year-old Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio of Buenos Aires, Argentina. He comes from a region of the world with 483 million Catholics — about 40 percent of all the church's faithful.

------------------------------

I thought this deserved its own thread
WHOOPS!!! :-[


(http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2530/4163859731_a3e26b0609_z.jpg?zz=1)

 :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Adela on March 13, 2013, 04:39:37 PM
That doesn't sound like Peter the Roman to me.

:P

Maybe because his name isn't Peter and he's not from Rome?

He's about as un-Peter* and un-Roman as you can get while still being a Catholic.

*=And by that I mean his names are George and Francis, and he was from an order started by a guy named Ignatius.

Hundreds of millions of Catholics do not have the name Peter, and are from a multitude of places other than Rome.  And yes, he's a Jesuit, many of whom are extremely "liberal" and many of whom are quite "conservative".  What, pray tell, is your point?

Maybe that reference to some st Malaky (or Malarky?) prophesy about the last pope to be called Peter the Roman?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 13, 2013, 04:40:50 PM
That doesn't sound like Peter the Roman to me.

:P

Maybe because his name isn't Peter and he's not from Rome?

He's about as un-Peter* and un-Roman as you can get while still being a Catholic.

*=And by that I mean his names are George and Francis, and he was from an order started by a guy named Ignatius.

Hundreds of millions of Catholics do not have the name Peter, and are from a multitude of places other than Rome.  And yes, he's a Jesuit, many of whom are extremely "liberal" and many of whom are quite "conservative".  What, pray tell, is your point?

Maybe that reference to some St Malaky (or Malarky?) prophesy about the last pope to be called Peter the Roman?

Your guess is as good as mine. 
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) on March 13, 2013, 04:44:12 PM
Here is a profile on the new Pope that was written 10 days ago by John Allen of the National Catholic Reporter.

http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/papabile-day-men-who-could-be-pope-13 (http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/papabile-day-men-who-could-be-pope-13)

Here are some tidbits from the above article to whet your curiosity further:

"(Cardinal) Bergoglio's reputation for personal simplicity also exercised an undeniable appeal – a Prince of the Church who chose to live in a simple apartment rather than the archbishop's palace, who gave up his chauffeured limousine in favor of taking the bus to work, and who cooked his own meals."

"(Cardinal) Bergoglio has supported the social justice ethos of Latin American Catholicism, including a robust defense of the poor.

At the same time, he has generally tended to accent growth in personal holiness over efforts for structural reform.

(Cardinal) Bergoglio is seen an unwaveringly orthodox on matters of sexual morality, staunchly opposing abortion, same-sex marriage, and contraception. In 2010 he asserted that gay adoption is a form of discrimination against children, earning a public rebuke from Argentina's President, Cristina Fernández de Kirchner." (My edits IAW Forum policy)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Schultz on March 13, 2013, 04:45:59 PM
That doesn't sound like Peter the Roman to me.

:P

Maybe because his name isn't Peter and he's not from Rome?

He's about as un-Peter* and un-Roman as you can get while still being a Catholic.

*=And by that I mean his names are George and Francis, and he was from an order started by a guy named Ignatius.

Hundreds of millions of Catholics do not have the name Peter, and are from a multitude of places other than Rome.  And yes, he's a Jesuit, many of whom are extremely "liberal" and many of whom are quite "conservative".  What, pray tell, is your point?

Maybe that reference to some St Malaky (or Malarky?) prophesy about the last pope to be called Peter the Roman?

Your guess is as good as mine. 

It's from the prophecy of St. Malachi which states that the last pope will be called Peter the Roman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophecy_of_the_Popes
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Cyrillic on March 13, 2013, 04:46:14 PM
I think I'm starting to like the new Pope.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 13, 2013, 04:48:06 PM
That doesn't sound like Peter the Roman to me.

:P

Maybe because his name isn't Peter and he's not from Rome?

He's about as un-Peter* and un-Roman as you can get while still being a Catholic.

*=And by that I mean his names are George and Francis, and he was from an order started by a guy named Ignatius.

Hundreds of millions of Catholics do not have the name Peter, and are from a multitude of places other than Rome.  And yes, he's a Jesuit, many of whom are extremely "liberal" and many of whom are quite "conservative".  What, pray tell, is your point?

Maybe that reference to some St Malaky (or Malarky?) prophesy about the last pope to be called Peter the Roman?

Your guess is as good as mine. 

It's from the prophecy of St. Malachi which states that the last pope will be called Peter the Roman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophecy_of_the_Popes

Thanks!  Have you studied cryptography or something?  Or am I just dense?  (No need to answer the second question  ;D ;D.)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Schultz on March 13, 2013, 04:49:01 PM
That doesn't sound like Peter the Roman to me.

:P

Maybe because his name isn't Peter and he's not from Rome?

He's about as un-Peter* and un-Roman as you can get while still being a Catholic.

*=And by that I mean his names are George and Francis, and he was from an order started by a guy named Ignatius.

Hundreds of millions of Catholics do not have the name Peter, and are from a multitude of places other than Rome.  And yes, he's a Jesuit, many of whom are extremely "liberal" and many of whom are quite "conservative".  What, pray tell, is your point?

Maybe that reference to some St Malaky (or Malarky?) prophesy about the last pope to be called Peter the Roman?

Your guess is as good as mine. 

It's from the prophecy of St. Malachi which states that the last pope will be called Peter the Roman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophecy_of_the_Popes

Thanks!  Have you studied cryptography or something?  Or am I just dense?  (No need to answer the second question  ;D ;D.)

It's been mentioned a number of times on here in the past week.  You're just not paying attention (and I don't blame you!) :P
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Alpo on March 13, 2013, 04:49:31 PM
I think I'm starting to like the new Pope.

I'm a sort of disappointed that they didn't re-elect Pope Benedict.
(http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/Themes/Pascha2010/images/warnwarn.gif)
I already warned you just a few days ago to use proper titles when referring to clergy, both Roman Catholic and Orthodox. That means NOT calling the retired Pope Benedict "Ratzinger". For your continued failure to use proper clergy titles even after my very recent warning, you are receiving this formal warning to last for the next two weeks. If you think this action wrong, please appeal it to me via private message.

- PeterTheAleut
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Adela on March 13, 2013, 04:53:15 PM
That doesn't sound like Peter the Roman to me.

:P

Maybe because his name isn't Peter and he's not from Rome?

He's about as un-Peter* and un-Roman as you can get while still being a Catholic.

*=And by that I mean his names are George and Francis, and he was from an order started by a guy named Ignatius.

Hundreds of millions of Catholics do not have the name Peter, and are from a multitude of places other than Rome.  And yes, he's a Jesuit, many of whom are extremely "liberal" and many of whom are quite "conservative".  What, pray tell, is your point?

Maybe that reference to some St Malaky (or Malarky?) prophesy about the last pope to be called Peter the Roman?

Your guess is as good as mine. 

It's from the prophecy of St. Malachi which states that the last pope will be called Peter the Roman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophecy_of_the_Popes

Thanks!  Have you studied cryptography or something?  Or am I just dense?  (No need to answer the second question  ;D ;D.)

It's been mentioned a number of times on here in the past week.  You're just not paying attention (and I don't blame you!) :P

Yeah, that's why I made the reference to Malarky.  It's really a bunch of Malarky, but some people really believe it.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 13, 2013, 04:57:21 PM
That doesn't sound like Peter the Roman to me.

:P

Maybe because his name isn't Peter and he's not from Rome?

He's about as un-Peter* and un-Roman as you can get while still being a Catholic.

*=And by that I mean his names are George and Francis, and he was from an order started by a guy named Ignatius.

Hundreds of millions of Catholics do not have the name Peter, and are from a multitude of places other than Rome.  And yes, he's a Jesuit, many of whom are extremely "liberal" and many of whom are quite "conservative".  What, pray tell, is your point?

Maybe that reference to some St Malaky (or Malarky?) prophesy about the last pope to be called Peter the Roman?

Your guess is as good as mine. 

It's from the prophecy of St. Malachi which states that the last pope will be called Peter the Roman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophecy_of_the_Popes

Thanks!  Have you studied cryptography or something?  Or am I just dense?  (No need to answer the second question  ;D ;D.)

It's been mentioned a number of times on here in the past week.  You're just not paying attention (and I don't blame you!) :P

Yeah, that's why I made the reference to Malarky.  It's really a bunch of Malarky, but some people really believe it.

Which is probably why I wasn't paying attention  ;D.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Gunnarr on March 13, 2013, 04:59:59 PM
No Orthodox Patriarch is spiritual father of 1 billion +.  If the Pope had the flock of a single nation or a few million souls I doubt there would be much fanfare.

Irrelevant. Orthodoxy isn't about being popular or mighty. It's about defending and proclaiming the truth.

Come on kids, cut it out. My point was simple. Patriarchal selection and deposition has historically been as flawed as that of the Roman popes. For example, look up Emperor Romanus I and his choice of his fourth son, 16 year old Theophylact, for the Patriarchal throne to succeed the aged once deposed and  twice enthroned Nicholas Mysticus. Poor Theophylact was castrated first so that he would not be unduly distracted from his churchly duties - something that perhaps should have been considered for Alexander Sixtus by the Curia.

This isn't a criticism of the current Patriarch, but come on, as an example, the current Patriarch of the "Third Rome" certainly projects a sense of power, fancy vestiture and media savvy as well as any Pope could hope for.


The one in Second Rome does too, if he can get the media to pay attention...
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Adela on March 13, 2013, 05:02:42 PM


Maybe that reference to some St Malaky (or Malarky?) prophesy about the last pope to be called Peter the Roman?

Your guess is as good as mine. 

It's from the prophecy of St. Malachi which states that the last pope will be called Peter the Roman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophecy_of_the_Popes

Thanks!  Have you studied cryptography or something?  Or am I just dense?  (No need to answer the second question  ;D ;D.)

It's been mentioned a number of times on here in the past week.  You're just not paying attention (and I don't blame you!) :P

Yeah, that's why I made the reference to Malarky.  It's really a bunch of Malarky, but some people really believe it.

Which is probably why I wasn't paying attention  ;D.

Probably a good idea....  Instead of focusing on such nonsense, keep your eye on the prize, keep watch and make sure your lamp doesn't go out.....  :angel:
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Fabio Leite on March 13, 2013, 05:09:33 PM
Quote
(http://www.intereconomia.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/668noticia_ppelota/100856/cck_images/BFQpE_DCUAAG-UE.jpg)
Jorge Mario Bergoglio, elegido Papa y que será conocido como Francisco I, es un reconocido aficionado al fútbol y declarado seguidor del club San Lorenzo de Almagro.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio, elected Pope and already knowns as Francis I, is a reknown fan of football and confessed supporter of the San Lorenzo de Almagro team.
http://www.intereconomia.com/noticias-/punto-pelota/papa-francisco-i-hincha-san-lorenzo-almagro-20130313

And also

Quote
The report said the comments (from then Cardinal Bergoglio) came during presentation of the Aparecida Document, a statement from the bishops of Latin America.

At that time, he (Cardinal Bergoglio)  even warned those who only support abortion.

“We should commit ourselves to ‘eucharistic coherence,’ that is, we should be conscious that people cannot receive holy communion and at the same time act or speak against the commandments, in particular when abortion, euthanasia, and other serious crimes against life and family are facilitated. The responsibility applies particularly to legislators, governors and health professionals.”
http://www.wnd.com/2013/03/new-pope-active-in-blasting-abortion-gay-marriage/
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Gunnarr on March 13, 2013, 05:10:28 PM
The Orthodox do recognize this election, right? Even though we arent in communion, don't we still recognize him officially as the Bishop of Rome?

well some might pretend to, but technically no he is not recognized...
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Gunnarr on March 13, 2013, 05:14:29 PM

I was watching Fox News this afternoon (which interestingly enough featured both a radically right-wing Zionist commercial and a commercial calling for acceptance of homosexual marriage) and they called it an "ancient ritual." I'm not sure if that came from ignorance of the election rite's age or ignorance of what period "ancient" refers to.

Are you talking about that commercial asking for aid for the jewish familys in israel or in former soviet countries with the crying old lady?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Fabio Leite on March 13, 2013, 05:20:29 PM
(http://imguol.com/2013/03/13/13mar13--jorge-mario-bergoglio-caminha-na-praca-de-sao-pedro-antes-do-inicio-do-conclave-que-o-escolheu-como-novo-papa-da-igreja-catolica-1363206284609_300x500.jpg)
http://noticias.uol.com.br/internacional/ultimas-noticias/2013/03/13/novo-papa-escolhe-o-nome-francisco-1.htm

He used to wear the overcoat even when in the Vatican to hide the cardinalean robes and not impose on people. He lives as monastically as possible, waking up 4:30 to start his prayers and taking a bus to his office (remembering me of Patriarch Pavle of Serbia, of eternal memory). He moved away from the Theology of Liberation early in his life and and opposes both the liberal social-cultural agenda and the free market ideology with a focus on Christian support for the poor. He opposes kirchnerism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirchnerism) back home.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Peter J on March 13, 2013, 05:21:59 PM
will take the name Pope Francis..... he is a Jesuit....  The first Jesuit pope, first Latin American Pope....

Also the first non-European pope in a thousand years.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Gunnarr on March 13, 2013, 05:33:05 PM
will take the name Pope Francis..... he is a Jesuit....  The first Jesuit pope, first Latin American Pope....

Also the first non-European pope in a thousand years.

CNN said he was the first since Saint Peter  ::)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: JamesR on March 13, 2013, 05:35:42 PM
So the first Latin American Pope huh? Not bad. Maybe next time it'll be a Mexican.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: LizaSymonenko on March 13, 2013, 05:38:08 PM

How old is he?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Fabio Leite on March 13, 2013, 05:38:56 PM

How old is he?

76
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Fabio Leite on March 13, 2013, 05:39:54 PM
So the first Latin American Pope huh? Not bad. Maybe next time it'll be a Mexican.

Actually the next two should be Brazilian. We will not forget this easily. :)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: biro on March 13, 2013, 05:40:30 PM
will take the name Pope Francis..... he is a Jesuit....  The first Jesuit pope, first Latin American Pope....

Also the first non-European pope in a thousand years.

CNN said he was the first since Saint Peter  ::)

Ouch
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Fabio Leite on March 13, 2013, 05:43:45 PM
The local (Brazil) RC TV said he was the first Latin....  ::)

will take the name Pope Francis..... he is a Jesuit....  The first Jesuit pope, first Latin American Pope....

Also the first non-European pope in a thousand years.

CNN said he was the first since Saint Peter  ::)

Ouch
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Cyrillic on March 13, 2013, 05:45:02 PM
The local (Brazil) RC TV said he was the first Latin....  ::)


LOL.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) on March 13, 2013, 05:46:34 PM
So the first Latin American Pope huh? Not bad. Maybe next time it'll be a Mexican.

He is of Italian descent BTW.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: biro on March 13, 2013, 05:49:03 PM
So the first Latin American Pope huh? Not bad. Maybe next time it'll be a Mexican.

Actually the next two should be Brazilian. We will not forget this easily. :)

I was kind of hoping for a Brazilian, too.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Fabio Leite on March 13, 2013, 05:56:20 PM
On hindsight, maybe it's fair. We got the Olympic Games and the World Cup in a row. Now the Argentinians get a Pope. Still 2X1 for us. :)
(and yes, I'm just kidding, I do know it's not a competition... :) )

So the first Latin American Pope huh? Not bad. Maybe next time it'll be a Mexican.

Actually the next two should be Brazilian. We will not forget this easily. :)

I was kind of hoping for a Brazilian, too.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Gorazd on March 13, 2013, 05:59:47 PM
Congratulation to all Roman Catholics! I really like (St.)* Francis of Assissi and I see it as a good sign that the new Pope of Rome chose that name. May Christ give him strength.


*no idea what's the forum policy about non-Orthodox sanctity titles, someone please enlighten me
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: brastaseptim on March 13, 2013, 06:04:27 PM
HABEMUS PAPAM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Sorry, just had to do it.  ;D
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Shiny on March 13, 2013, 06:13:27 PM
So what are the immediate challenges the new Pope faces?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Fabio Leite on March 13, 2013, 06:14:10 PM
Some more info about Pope Francis I.

As Cardinal Begoglio, he had a long and friendly relation with the Russian Orthodox Church in Argentina. He was present in the Divine Liturgy celebrated by Metropolitan Platon on September 23rd, 2012. His favorite author is Dostoievsky. He is the main political opposer of Cristina Kirchner (someone will have troubles in the next years :) ). Argentinian leftist congresmen define him as "the worst enemy, because he is a very intelligent enemy". Also he has expressed himself in unequivocal terms for the "redistribution of wealth", "social justice", and against neoliberalism. A pope to raise the discontent of both the left and the right in some of their most cherished flags. Some pundits are already suggesting he will be for the Latin-American Left what Pope John Paul II was for Communism in Eastern Europe (God hear them!).

He has always cooked his own food, despite the fact he could have a cook for him alone. His main food is vegetables and boiled chicken. He refused to live in the Cardinelean Palace to live in a flat. We may expect his enemies to slander him with accusations of collaborating with the previous Argentinian dictatorship (these accusations are already ongoing - and welcome to our world, RCs. :) )
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Fabio Leite on March 13, 2013, 06:20:16 PM
So what are the immediate challenges the new Pope faces?

Reformation of the Curia
Scandals, both financial and sexual
RC image
Bringing back lapsed RC and those who converted to other Christian faiths and religions
Restauration of more traditional forms of the Mass
Show the RC cares about the poor and destituted without letting the RC be used by Marxists or Frankfurtians of the Liberation Theology for their own revolutionary agenda (and yes, far too many "intellectuals" and people with power in Latin-America still believe in a communist revolution, and choosing him shows the RC is aware of that)

These are the immediate ones. Later he may have time for further reconstruction of the RC, such as getting rid of Papal Infalibility and Supremacy. :)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: podkarpatska on March 13, 2013, 06:24:42 PM
Interesting. The Wikipedia article on him says he was "Bishop of the Ordinariate for the Eastern Rites in Argentina" which means he is at least familiar with Catholicism's "Eastern Rite".

I asked an EC Facebook friend what that meant. His reply was that there being no"ordinary" bishop for the EC eparchy in Argentina that he oversees their parishes, vocations etc... It doesn't necessarily really mean he has or doesn't have any eastern insight.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: mike on March 13, 2013, 06:26:33 PM
Interesting. The Wikipedia article on him says he was "Bishop of the Ordinariate for the Eastern Rites in Argentina" which means he is at least familiar with Catholicism's "Eastern Rite".

I asked an EC Facebook friend what that meant. His reply was that there being no"ordinary" bishop for the EC eparchy in Argentina that he oversees their parishes, vocations etc... It doesn't necessarily really mean he has or doesn't have any eastern insight.

There was at least one (Bp. Shevchuk, does it ring a bell? ;)) however he supposedly was responsible only for the Ukrainian rite, and this one for the rest.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 13, 2013, 06:30:21 PM
He was accused of denouncing priests and monks to Videla's forces.

They keep saying that that tradition goes all the way back almost 2000 years, to the time of St. Peter. Is that really true? The smoke and all?  

AFAIR, most of the procedures are from XVIIth or XVIIIth century
Try the XIX and XXth.

The smoke, for instance, only dates from about a century ago.  The balcony blessing they just said dates only from 1939. Secular powers were first barred in 1914.  It has been in the Sistine Chapel and the Vatican only since 1878, which was also the first time non-European cardinals participated. The conclave dates only from 1274, and the college of cardinals only from 1061. WAY after St. Peter.

Still, old enough.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 13, 2013, 06:30:21 PM
will take the name Pope Francis..... he is a Jesuit....  The first Jesuit pope, first Latin American Pope....

Also the first non-European pope in a thousand years.

CNN said he was the first since Saint Peter  ::)
CNN, as nearly always, is wrong: for one thing the first Latin bishop of Rome was St. Victor c. 188, from Africa.

When Pope Gregory X was elected in 1271, he was in Palestine, though he was a Crusader and therefore European.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 13, 2013, 06:30:21 PM
Congratulation to all Roman Catholics! I really like (St.)* Francis of Assissi and I see it as a good sign that the new Pope of Rome chose that name. May Christ give him strength.


*no idea what's the forum policy about non-Orthodox sanctity titles, someone please enlighten me
on EWTN (you guys get that in Europe? It's the conservative channel of the Vatican's followers) they say it was Francis Xavier, the Jesuit who instituted the Inquisition in Asia.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/db/Franciscus_de_Xabier.jpg)
Quote
Francis Xavier requested the foundation of the Goa Inquisition, but he never saw it happen; it commenced eight years after his death. On 16 May 1545, Xavier wrote to the King of Portugal to establish the Inquisition in Goa: "The second necessity for the Christians is that Your Majesty establish the Holy Inquisition in Goa because there are many who live according to the Jewish Law and according to the Mohammedan Sect, without any fear of God or shame of the World. And since there are many Hindus who are spread all over the fortresses, there is the need of the Holy Inquisition, and of many preachers. Your Majesty should provide such necessary things for your loyal and faithful subjects in the Indies."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Xavier#Proselytism_and_Goa_Inquisition
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 13, 2013, 06:30:21 PM
Here's hoping and praying that he continues Pope Benedict's restoration of the liturgy.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 13, 2013, 06:30:21 PM
Did any one else notice that in his address, His Holiness kept referring to himself as "a bishop" and "the Bishop of Rome" ?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 13, 2013, 06:30:21 PM
Some more info about Pope Francis I.

As Cardinal Begoglio, he had a long and friendly relation with the Russian Orthodox Church in Argentina. He was present in the Divine Liturgy celebrated by Metropolitan Platon on September 23rd, 2012. His favorite author is Dostoievsky. He is the main political opposer of Cristina Kirchner (someone will have troubles in the next years :) ). Argentinian leftist congresmen define him as "the wors enemy, because he is a very intelligent enemy". Also he has expressed himself in unequivocal terms for the "redistribution of wealth", "social justice", and against neoliberalism. A pope to raise the discontent of both the left and the right in some of their most cherished flags. Some pundits are already suggesting he will be for the Latin-American Left what Pope John Paul II was for Communism in Eastern Europe (God hear them!).

He has always cooked his own food, despite the fact he could have a cook for him alone. His main food is vegetables and boiled chicken.
Great stuff! The only thing that concerns me is that I heard some ugly rumors that he suppressed the TLM in his diocese. Does anyone know if there is any truth to this?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 13, 2013, 06:30:21 PM


These are the immediate ones. Later he may have time for further reconstruction of the RC, such as getting rid of Papal Infalibility and Supremacy. :)
Ha ha. Ain't gonna happen. :)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Deacon Lance on March 13, 2013, 06:31:03 PM
Interesting. The Wikipedia article on him says he was "Bishop of the Ordinariate for the Eastern Rites in Argentina" which means he is at least familiar with Catholicism's "Eastern Rite".

I asked an EC Facebook friend what that meant. His reply was that there being no"ordinary" bishop for the EC eparchy in Argentina that he oversees their parishes, vocations etc... It doesn't necessarily really mean he has or doesn't have any eastern insight.

Oh he does!  And he can celebrate the Byzantine Liturgy!
http://risu.org.ua/en/index/all_news/catholics/ugcc/51592/

Also, there are Eastern Catholic Eparchies in Argentina: Ukrainian, Melkite, Maronite, and Armenian.  His oversight would have been for Russian and Romanians who have a few parishes and no Eparchy.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Deacon Lance on March 13, 2013, 06:32:06 PM
Here's hoping and praying that he continues Pope Benedict's restoration of the liturgy.
Seems more of like mind with Blessed John Paul II.  People are already complaining because he didn't wear the mozzetta, only wore the stole for the blessing, and broke protocol several times.  I say good for him.  I am more impressed he took the bus and cooked his own meals.  Some bishops live like princes, with a staff to match.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Deacon Lance on March 13, 2013, 06:35:23 PM
Some more info about Pope Francis I.

As Cardinal Begoglio, he had a long and friendly relation with the Russian Orthodox Church in Argentina. He was present in the Divine Liturgy celebrated by Metropolitan Platon on September 23rd, 2012. His favorite author is Dostoievsky. He is the main political opposer of Cristina Kirchner (someone will have troubles in the next years :) ). Argentinian leftist congresmen define him as "the wors enemy, because he is a very intelligent enemy". Also he has expressed himself in unequivocal terms for the "redistribution of wealth", "social justice", and against neoliberalism. A pope to raise the discontent of both the left and the right in some of their most cherished flags. Some pundits are already suggesting he will be for the Latin-American Left what Pope John Paul II was for Communism in Eastern Europe (God hear them!).

He has always cooked his own food, despite the fact he could have a cook for him alone. His main food is vegetables and boiled chicken.
Great stuff! The only thing that concerns me is that I heard some ugly rumors that he suppressed the TLM in his diocese. Does anyone know if there is any truth to this?

They are rending their robes over at rorate-caeli, so he must not have been very supportive.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 13, 2013, 06:46:14 PM
Here's hoping and praying that he continues Pope Benedict's restoration of the liturgy.
Seems more of like mind with Blessed John Paul II.
:( If that is the case, I'll be a bit disappointed. However, I pray that the Holy Father has a blessed reign.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 13, 2013, 06:46:14 PM
Some more info about Pope Francis I.

As Cardinal Begoglio, he had a long and friendly relation with the Russian Orthodox Church in Argentina. He was present in the Divine Liturgy celebrated by Metropolitan Platon on September 23rd, 2012. His favorite author is Dostoievsky. He is the main political opposer of Cristina Kirchner (someone will have troubles in the next years :) ). Argentinian leftist congresmen define him as "the wors enemy, because he is a very intelligent enemy". Also he has expressed himself in unequivocal terms for the "redistribution of wealth", "social justice", and against neoliberalism. A pope to raise the discontent of both the left and the right in some of their most cherished flags. Some pundits are already suggesting he will be for the Latin-American Left what Pope John Paul II was for Communism in Eastern Europe (God hear them!).

He has always cooked his own food, despite the fact he could have a cook for him alone. His main food is vegetables and boiled chicken.
Great stuff! The only thing that concerns me is that I heard some ugly rumors that he suppressed the TLM in his diocese. Does anyone know if there is any truth to this?

They are rending their robes over at rorate-caeli, so he must not have been very supportive.
Not gonna lie. That stress me out bit. I mean, I'm not sackclothe and ashes yet, but still....
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Benjamin the Red on March 13, 2013, 06:52:40 PM
Some more info about Pope Francis I.

As Cardinal Begoglio, he had a long and friendly relation with the Russian Orthodox Church in Argentina. He was present in the Divine Liturgy celebrated by Metropolitan Platon on September 23rd, 2012. His favorite author is Dostoievsky. He is the main political opposer of Cristina Kirchner (someone will have troubles in the next years :) ). Argentinian leftist congresmen define him as "the wors enemy, because he is a very intelligent enemy". Also he has expressed himself in unequivocal terms for the "redistribution of wealth", "social justice", and against neoliberalism. A pope to raise the discontent of both the left and the right in some of their most cherished flags. Some pundits are already suggesting he will be for the Latin-American Left what Pope John Paul II was for Communism in Eastern Europe (God hear them!).

He has always cooked his own food, despite the fact he could have a cook for him alone. His main food is vegetables and boiled chicken.
Great stuff! The only thing that concerns me is that I heard some ugly rumors that he suppressed the TLM in his diocese. Does anyone know if there is any truth to this?

They are rending their robes over at rorate-caeli, so he must not have been very supportive.
Not gonna lie. That stress me out bit. I mean, I'm not sackclothe and ashes yet, but still....

I would have to agree. I was rather sad when Pope Benedict resigned, and was hoping for someone who would continue his work to reform the Liturgy. To hear that he may be more in the vein of JPII disappoints me.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Benjamin the Red on March 13, 2013, 06:57:12 PM
Quote
The new pope took the name Francis in honor of St. Francis of Assisi because he is a lover of the poor, Vatican spokesman the Rev. Tom Rosica told CNN.

Link. (http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2013/03/13/cardinals-elect-new-pope/)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Deacon Lance on March 13, 2013, 07:00:31 PM
Videos of his Masses look like reverent Ordinary form Masses.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: podkarpatska on March 13, 2013, 07:10:02 PM
No Orthodox Patriarch is spiritual father of 1 billion +.  If the Pope had the flock of a single nation or a few million souls I doubt there would be much fanfare.

Irrelevant. Orthodoxy isn't about being popular or mighty. It's about defending and proclaiming the truth.

Come on kids, cut it out. My point was simple. Patriarchal selection and deposition has historically been as flawed as that of the Roman popes. For example, look up Emperor Romanus I and his choice of his fourth son, 16 year old Theophylact, for the Patriarchal throne to succeed the aged once deposed and  twice enthroned Nicholas Mysticus. Poor Theophylact was castrated first so that he would not be unduly distracted from his churchly duties - something that perhaps should have been considered for Alexander Sixtus by the Curia.

This isn't a criticism of the current Patriarch, but come on, as an example, the current Patriarch of the "Third Rome" certainly projects a sense of power, fancy vestiture and media savvy as well as any Pope could hope for.


The one in Second Rome does too, if he can get the media to pay attention...

Agreed and I would argue that those attributes are a positive in today's world.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: AntonI on March 13, 2013, 07:12:55 PM
Lord Almighty - reading a particular forum one would think that the Anti-Christ has taken over the Papacy and we are soon to be getting wummin priests, dancing masses, no fancy tat and persecution of all faithful priests celebrating the traditional mass.

Also he apparently destroyed the Argentinian Church.

THE WORLD IS DOOMED!  DOOMED I SAY!
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: podkarpatska on March 13, 2013, 07:23:29 PM
Did any one else notice that in his address, His Holiness kept referring to himself as "a bishop" and "the Bishop of Rome" ?

Yes and his comment on the conclave was translated as being its mission to "appoint" a Bishop of Rome rather than "elect" a Pope. I don't read tea leaves but I pray it signals a return to more collegiality among the Bishops and less "imperium" from the Bishop of Rome. That would be welcomed by the Orthodox.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 13, 2013, 07:25:43 PM
The new Pope Francis I showed his approval of things charismatic when he asked the people at St. Peter's to pray for him, and he bowed his head for that moment of silence. That was a first.

Note how he also bowed his head and knelt down to accept prayers from both Protestant Pentecostals and Catholic Priests alike at this Catholic and Evangelical Renewal convention of the "III Encuentro Fraterno organizado por la fundación CRECES (Comunión Renovada de Evangélicos y Católicos en el Espíritu Santo)." Scroll down to view this photo.

http://ceirberea.blogdiario.com/1154140980/

That Catholic Charismatics have met and prayed at the Vatican is not new, but this was the first Pope to ask the laity to pray for him at his first appearance immediately following his election.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 13, 2013, 07:29:50 PM
Lord Almighty - reading a particular forum one would think that the Anti-Christ has taken over the Papacy and we are soon to be getting wummin priests, dancing masses, no fancy tat and persecution of all faithful priests celebrating the traditional mass.

Also he apparently destroyed the Argentinian Church.

THE WORLD IS DOOMED!  DOOMED I SAY!

Fisheaters?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 13, 2013, 07:30:30 PM
My ultra-traddie SSPXer "friend" on FB blew his top when he found out who the new Pope is.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Peter J on March 13, 2013, 07:34:24 PM
Melkites and Antiochian Orthodox have the best relations of all the Vatican caused schisms.  Many Antiochians don't look at the Melkites as different, will (unofficially) allow intercommunion (almost officially), etc.  The Melkites insist on many the same conditions we do for reunion, and would work not only for that but for the Orthodox in general, in Antioch and elsewhere, as well.

Incidentally, 0.71% of Argentina is Melkite (300000).

Granted that's not a huge percentage, but compared with the fact that only 0.01% of the USA is Melkite ...
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: AntonI on March 13, 2013, 07:38:10 PM
Quote
Fisheaters?

I expect the Papal Installation ceremony to be changed with Pope Francis ("call me Francie") sitting down having a tete-a-tete with Rev Nicky Gumble and having an Alpha-Course ceremony.  Whilst lighting is striking down St Peters.  And clown mass in the background.  

Hopefully a nice public burning of a traditionalist or two.  Apparently they make good fuel.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: mike on March 13, 2013, 07:39:17 PM
That Catholic Charismatics have met and prayed at the Vatican is not new, but this was the first Pope to ask the laity to pray for him at his first appearance immediately following his election.

And what's wrong with that?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 13, 2013, 07:39:59 PM
Did any one else notice that in his address, His Holiness kept referring to himself as "a bishop" and "the Bishop of Rome" ?

Yes and his comment on the conclave was translated as being its mission to "appoint" a Bishop of Rome rather than "elect" a Pope. I don't read tea leaves but I pray it signals a return to more collegiality among the Bishops and less "imperium" from the Bishop of Rome. That would be welcomed by the Orthodox.
I think it was deliberate, as he didn't mention the word "Pope" once.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 13, 2013, 07:39:59 PM
The new Pope Francis I showed his approval of things charismatic when he asked the people at St. Peter's to pray for him, and he bowed his head for that moment of silence. That was a first.

Note how he also bowed his head and knelt down to accept prayers from both Protestant Pentecostals and Catholic Priests alike at this Catholic and Evangelical Renewal convention of the "III Encuentro Fraterno organizado por la fundación CRECES (Comunión Renovada de Evangélicos y Católicos en el Espíritu Santo)." Scroll down to view this photo.

http://ceirberea.blogdiario.com/1154140980/

That Catholic Charismatics have met and prayed at the Vatican is not new, but this was the first Pope to ask the laity to pray for him at his first appearance immediately following his election.
Yes, traditionalists are all perspiring heavily right now. We will have to wait and see.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 13, 2013, 07:39:59 PM
My ultra-traddie SSPXer "friend" on FB blew his top when he found out who the new Pope is.
We traddies are just a bit worried about his joint prayer meetings with protestants, and his apparent ambivalence to the TLM. That being said, God may raise him up and make the Holy Father into a saintly pope.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 13, 2013, 07:40:18 PM
Quote
Fisheaters?

I expect the Papal Installation ceremony to be changed with Pope Francis ("call me Francie") sitting down having a tete-a-tete with Rev Nicky Gumble and having an Alpha-Course ceremony.  Whilst lighting is striking down St Peters.  And clown mass in the background.  

Hopefully a nice public burning of a traditionalist or two.  Apparently they make good fuel.

Don't they self-ignite at the sight of things they consider "modernist"?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 13, 2013, 07:41:19 PM
My ultra-traddie SSPXer "friend" on FB blew his top when he found out who the new Pope is.
We traddies are just a bit worried about his joint prayer meetings with protestants, and his apparent ambivalence to the TLM. That being said, God may raise him up and make the Holy Father into a saintly pope.

Oh no, this guy is beyond worried.

Quote
From what I can tell, this guy is the worst modernist to be elected pope since Vatican II..I knew a chastisement was coming, I didn't expect this.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: AntonI on March 13, 2013, 07:42:04 PM
Quote
And what's wrong with that?

It shows he is a *look around* L-I-B-E-R-A-L.  Bent on destroying traditional.  Ruining the See of St Peter.  Bringing himself down to the same level as the masses.

EVIL!  EVIL!  *makes sign of the cross, throws salt over shoulder and whip ones back*

Quote
Don't they self-ignite at the sight of things they consider "modernist"?

Don't be silly.  That's an Orthodox schismatic heresy.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 13, 2013, 07:43:36 PM
Bringing himself down to the same level as the masses.

Yes, because Christ called on our bishops to be kings and emperors, rulers of all.



*INFALLIBLE SARCASM*
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: podkarpatska on March 13, 2013, 07:44:34 PM
Quote
Fisheaters?

I expect the Papal Installation ceremony to be changed with Pope Francis ("call me Francie") sitting down having a tete-a-tete with Rev Nicky Gumble and having an Alpha-Course ceremony.  Whilst lighting is striking down St Peters.  And clown mass in the background.  

Hopefully a nice public burning of a traditionalist or two.  Apparently they make good fuel.

Don't they self-ignite at the sight of things they consider "modernist"?

Well, their Orthodox counterparts have been known to do so.   ;) ;)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 13, 2013, 07:45:09 PM
Quote
Fisheaters?

I expect the Papal Installation ceremony to be changed with Pope Francis ("call me Francie") sitting down having a tete-a-tete with Rev Nicky Gumble and having an Alpha-Course ceremony.  Whilst lighting is striking down St Peters.  And clown mass in the background.  

Hopefully a nice public burning of a traditionalist or two.  Apparently they make good fuel.

Don't they self-ignite at the sight of things they consider "modernist"?

Well, their Orthodox counterparts have been known to do so.   ;) ;)

No, we just OUTRAGE!  ;D
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: mike on March 13, 2013, 07:49:14 PM
Machine translation from Ukrainian:

Quote
Head of the UGCC MAbp Sviatoslav Shevchuk: "The newly elected Pope Francisco and is a disciple of our priest Stephen Chmil, now buried in the Basilica of St. Sophia in Rome. Current Pope, then a student of the Salesian school every morning were all his colleagues were still asleep, served to Fr. Chmil during the Divine Liturgy. He knows our rite and even remembers our Liturgy. Last time I visited him when I was departing Argentina, upon leaving for Ukraine, and asked that he give his testimony for beatification process of Fr. Chmil, to which he readily agreed. Therefore, the Holy Father knows very well our Church, and our Liturgy and rites, and our spirituality. "

https://www.facebook.com/r.andrusyak/posts/439443279475007
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: NicholasMyra on March 13, 2013, 07:49:39 PM
Wise choice of a south american.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 13, 2013, 07:50:20 PM
Machine translation from Ukrainian:

Quote
Head of the UGCC MAbp Sviatoslav Shevchuk: "The newly elected Pope Francisco and is a disciple of our priest Stephen Chmil, now buried in the Basilica of St. Sophia in Rome. Current Pope, then a student of the Salesian school every morning were all his colleagues were still asleep, served to Fr. Chmil during the Divine Liturgy. He knows our rite and even remembers our Liturgy. Last time I visited him when I was departing Argentina, upon leaving for Ukraine, and asked that he give his testimony for beatification process of Fr. Chmil, to which he readily agreed. Therefore, the Holy Father knows very well our Church, and our Liturgy and rites, and our spirituality. "

https://www.facebook.com/r.andrusyak/posts/439443279475007

I hope he railroads the granting of Patriarchal status to the UGCC.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: AntonI on March 13, 2013, 07:51:31 PM
Quote
Well, their Orthodox counterparts have been known to do so.   

No, we just OUTRAGE! 


Well, yes.  

I am still waiting for the Divine Liturgy - Clown Style.  

Clothes prepared by RuPaul.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: AGGreen on March 13, 2013, 07:53:39 PM
Did any one else notice that in his address, His Holiness kept referring to himself as "a bishop" and "the Bishop of Rome" ?


***The pope IS the Bishop of Rome. That's his See.

tags editted - MK
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 13, 2013, 07:56:37 PM
Quote
Well, their Orthodox counterparts have been known to do so.   

No, we just OUTRAGE! 


Well, yes.  

I am still waiting for the Divine Liturgy - Clown Style.  

Clothes prepared by RuPaul.

That will never happen.  The Yaiyas and the Babas will see to that.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: podkarpatska on March 13, 2013, 07:57:36 PM
Did any one else notice that in his address, His Holiness kept referring to himself as "a bishop" and "the Bishop of Rome" ?


***The pope IS the Bishop of Rome. That's his See.

tags editted - MK

I think we both know that - I was commenting on what seemed to be his emphasis on the See of Rome rather than the institutional papacy.


Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 13, 2013, 07:58:14 PM
Lord Almighty - reading a particular forum one would think that the Anti-Christ has taken over the Papacy and we are soon to be getting wummin priests, dancing masses, no fancy tat and persecution of all faithful priests celebrating the traditional mass.

Also he apparently destroyed the Argentinian Church.

THE WORLD IS DOOMED!  DOOMED I SAY!

Fisheaters?
You have to understand that we are all just a little frustrated. I mean, proper liturgy should not depend on if we happen to have the right Pope in Rome.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 13, 2013, 07:58:14 PM
My ultra-traddie SSPXer "friend" on FB blew his top when he found out who the new Pope is.
We traddies are just a bit worried about his joint prayer meetings with protestants, and his apparent ambivalence to the TLM. That being said, God may raise him up and make the Holy Father into a saintly pope.

Oh no, this guy is beyond worried.

Quote
From what I can tell, this guy is the worst modernist to be elected pope since Vatican II..I knew a chastisement was coming, I didn't expect this.
Haha. Fair enough. I see what you mean. Though I have my concerns as well.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 13, 2013, 07:58:14 PM
Ok, now I see the crazies. There is some rad-trad saying that he wants to see the "apostates bleed to death" when Rome is restored. Clearly this guy is a crazy person.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 13, 2013, 07:58:21 PM
Did any one else notice that in his address, His Holiness kept referring to himself as "a bishop" and "the Bishop of Rome" ?

Yes and his comment on the conclave was translated as being its mission to "appoint" a Bishop of Rome rather than "elect" a Pope. I don't read tea leaves but I pray it signals a return to more collegiality among the Bishops and less "imperium" from the Bishop of Rome. That would be welcomed by the Orthodox.
That's probably some what of a good thing. The Church does not have to be as centralized as it is in order to remain faithful our beliefs about the Papacy.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: AntonI on March 13, 2013, 07:58:44 PM
Oh dear Lord no.  

That's a part-time job.  Every other Thursday except the third week of the month when he goes to play bingo.  Mrs Goggins runs it the rest of the time, in between running the Post Office.

*taps nose* Supreme Pontiff.  That's where the moolah is, you mark my words.  Also, INQUISITION!  We all love the INQUISITION!

http://youtu.be/jbcyiFt5VEs (http://youtu.be/jbcyiFt5VEs)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 13, 2013, 08:02:52 PM
Lord Almighty - reading a particular forum one would think that the Anti-Christ has taken over the Papacy and we are soon to be getting wummin priests, dancing masses, no fancy tat and persecution of all faithful priests celebrating the traditional mass.

Also he apparently destroyed the Argentinian Church.

THE WORLD IS DOOMED!  DOOMED I SAY!

Fisheaters?
You have to understand that we are all just a little frustrated. I mean, proper liturgy should not depend on if we happen to have the right Pope in Rome.

How about going out there and actually doing something?  I mean, there are problems with Liturgy with the Orthodox as well, but we don't complain about it as much as traddies would.  And to think the Orthodox outnumber the traddies.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: podkarpatska on March 13, 2013, 08:05:14 PM
Did any one else notice that in his address, His Holiness kept referring to himself as "a bishop" and "the Bishop of Rome" ?

Yes and his comment on the conclave was translated as being its mission to "appoint" a Bishop of Rome rather than "elect" a Pope. I don't read tea leaves but I pray it signals a return to more collegiality among the Bishops and less "imperium" from the Bishop of Rome. That would be welcomed by the Orthodox.
That's probably some what of a good thing. The Church does not have to be as centralized as it is in order to remain faithful our beliefs about the Papacy.

We would argue the contrary. Rome's claims to universality and supremacy following Vatican I in particular, require intense centralization and the transfer of proper authority from regional ruling diocesan bishops to a central clearing house. We welcome the the strengthening of National Bishop Conferences, collegial decision making and consensus.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 13, 2013, 08:08:26 PM
Did any one else notice that in his address, His Holiness kept referring to himself as "a bishop" and "the Bishop of Rome" ?

Yes and his comment on the conclave was translated as being its mission to "appoint" a Bishop of Rome rather than "elect" a Pope. I don't read tea leaves but I pray it signals a return to more collegiality among the Bishops and less "imperium" from the Bishop of Rome. That would be welcomed by the Orthodox.
That's probably some what of a good thing. The Church does not have to be as centralized as it is in order to remain faithful our beliefs about the Papacy.

We would argue the contrary. Rome's claims to universality and supremacy following Vatican I in particular, require intense centralization and the transfer of proper authority from regional ruling diocesan bishops to a central clearing house. We welcome the the strengthening of National Bishop Conferences, collegial decision making and consensus.

Meh, the national episcopal conferences are part of the problem.  They replaced the national synods that used to exist.  Reinstate the Primates and the National Synods if you really want to de-centralize the Roman Church.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 13, 2013, 08:09:57 PM
Lord Almighty - reading a particular forum one would think that the Anti-Christ has taken over the Papacy and we are soon to be getting wummin priests, dancing masses, no fancy tat and persecution of all faithful priests celebrating the traditional mass.

Also he apparently destroyed the Argentinian Church.

THE WORLD IS DOOMED!  DOOMED I SAY!

Fisheaters?
You have to understand that we are all just a little frustrated. I mean, proper liturgy should not depend on if we happen to have the right Pope in Rome.

How about going out there and actually doing something?  I mean, there are problems with Liturgy with the Orthodox as well, but we don't complain about it as much as traddies would.  And to think the Orthodox outnumber the traddies.
Many traddies are doing something: writing letters to and speaking with their bishops, supporting the FSSP, attending reverent liturgies, etc.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: LBK on March 13, 2013, 08:11:08 PM
Quote
Well, their Orthodox counterparts have been known to do so.   

No, we just OUTRAGE! 


Well, yes.  

I am still waiting for the Divine Liturgy - Clown Style.  

Clothes prepared by RuPaul.

That will never happen.  The Yaiyas and the Babas will see to that.

Yup. We should all be grateful for these devout, no-nonsense and indomitable ladies.  :D
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: icecreamsandwich on March 13, 2013, 08:13:22 PM
Congrats to the Roman Catholics amongst us, and those elsewhere :). Hopefully he'll be a really great Pope and help the Church through this time of its history...
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: podkarpatska on March 13, 2013, 08:14:49 PM
Did any one else notice that in his address, His Holiness kept referring to himself as "a bishop" and "the Bishop of Rome" ?

Yes and his comment on the conclave was translated as being its mission to "appoint" a Bishop of Rome rather than "elect" a Pope. I don't read tea leaves but I pray it signals a return to more collegiality among the Bishops and less "imperium" from the Bishop of Rome. That would be welcomed by the Orthodox.
That's probably some what of a good thing. The Church does not have to be as centralized as it is in order to remain faithful our beliefs about the Papacy.

We would argue the contrary. Rome's claims to universality and supremacy following Vatican I in particular, require intense centralization and the transfer of proper authority from regional ruling diocesan bishops to a central clearing house. We welcome the the strengthening of National Bishop Conferences, collegial decision making and consensus.

Meh, the national episcopal conferences are part of the problem.  They replaced the national synods that used to exist.  Reinstate the Primates and the National Synods if you really want to de-centralize the Roman Church.

The journey of a thousand miles (or years) begins with a single step.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 13, 2013, 08:16:20 PM
Machine translation from Ukrainian:

Quote
Head of the UGCC MAbp Sviatoslav Shevchuk: "The newly elected Pope Francisco and is a disciple of our priest Stephen Chmil, now buried in the Basilica of St. Sophia in Rome. Current Pope, then a student of the Salesian school every morning were all his colleagues were still asleep, served to Fr. Chmil during the Divine Liturgy. He knows our rite and even remembers our Liturgy. Last time I visited him when I was departing Argentina, upon leaving for Ukraine, and asked that he give his testimony for beatification process of Fr. Chmil, to which he readily agreed. Therefore, the Holy Father knows very well our Church, and our Liturgy and rites, and our spirituality. "

https://www.facebook.com/r.andrusyak/posts/439443279475007

I hope he railroads the granting of Patriarchal status to the UGCC.
Lord spare us.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Fabio Leite on March 13, 2013, 08:36:01 PM
Did any one else notice that in his address, His Holiness kept referring to himself as "a bishop" and "the Bishop of Rome" ?

I did. I suppose it's just out of habit and because he certainly was a bit nervous and did not have a prepared speech.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 13, 2013, 08:40:25 PM
Lord spare us.

From what?  Its not our communion.  I just want my old friends in the UGCC to be happy.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Fabio Leite on March 13, 2013, 08:46:37 PM
"As expected, Pope excomunicates all Brazilians. Maradona is new Secretary of State of Vatican."
The original title was "Pele is proclaimed a heresiarch".
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: podkarpatska on March 13, 2013, 08:57:23 PM
Lord spare us.

From what?  Its not our communion.  I just want my old friends in the UGCC to be happy.

It's not so simple. Granting the UGCC Patriarchal status would infuriate the Russian Orthodox and the Russian nationalists and cause turmoil within the already splintered Orthodox groups in Ukraine. Pressure to grant autocephaly or a simple declaration of autocephaly would place great pressure upon and exacerbate tensions within Orthodoxy and its national churches. Realpolitik dictates against Papal action and the likelihood of Rome abandoning realpolitik seems remote at best.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 13, 2013, 09:01:34 PM
Lord spare us.

From what?  Its not our communion.  I just want my old friends in the UGCC to be happy.

It's not so simple. Granting the UGCC Patriarchal status would infuriate the Russian Orthodox and the Russian nationalists and cause turmoil within the already splintered Orthodox groups in Ukraine. Pressure to grant autocephaly or a simple declaration of autocephaly would place great pressure upon and exacerbate tensions within Orthodoxy and its national churches. Realpolitik dictates against Papal action and the likelihood of Rome abandoning realpolitik seems remote at best.

I know that ;)

As much as we "blame" the EP for not granting autocephally to the OCA to fix the jurisdictional mess in North America, why does Russia want to keep control of the Church in Ukraine?  It is a separate country now, they should just grant them autocephally.  The other Orthodox Churches there in schism will fall in line quickly if they are allowed to govern themselves.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Shiny on March 13, 2013, 09:05:44 PM
LOL.  They elected a Jesuit.
Yeah I got a laugh out of that as well. Maybe that's what the Curia needs.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Peter J on March 13, 2013, 09:10:45 PM
As much as we "blame" the EP for not granting autocephally to the OCA to fix the jurisdictional mess in North America,
...

Would it be that simple? I was under the impression that some of the non-OCA Orthodox would feel slighted if that happened.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Fabio Leite on March 13, 2013, 09:19:33 PM
And Maduro, president of Venezuela, made a pronouncement saying that the new pope was elected because Hugo Chavez influenced Jesus in Heaven to choose a South-American. Said that with a serious, plain face, no shame at all.


Quote
"We know that our commander ascended to Heaven and is face-to-face with Christ", said Maduro in a literary fair in Caracas. "Something influenced the choice of a south-american, someone new arrived at Christ's side and told him: 'Well, it seems to us it's time for South-America".

"He (Chávez) can summon a Constituent Assembly in heaven at any time to change the Church on Earth, so that only people of Christ can govern the world", added Maduro.

http://www.estadao.com.br/noticias/internacional,maduro-diz-que-chavez-pode-ter-influenciado-eleicao-de-papa,1008320,0.htm
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 13, 2013, 09:20:31 PM
As much as we "blame" the EP for not granting autocephally to the OCA to fix the jurisdictional mess in North America,
...

Would it be that simple? I was under the impression that some of the non-OCA Orthodox would feel slighted if that happened.

Why should they?  The jurisdiction of America should be under a Church in America, not one on another continent.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: podkarpatska on March 13, 2013, 09:26:08 PM
Lord spare us.

From what?  Its not our communion.  I just want my old friends in the UGCC to be happy.

It's not so simple. Granting the UGCC Patriarchal status would infuriate the Russian Orthodox and the Russian nationalists and cause turmoil within the already splintered Orthodox groups in Ukraine. Pressure to grant autocephaly or a simple declaration of autocephaly would place great pressure upon and exacerbate tensions within Orthodoxy and its national churches. Realpolitik dictates against Papal action and the likelihood of Rome abandoning realpolitik seems remote at best.

I know that ;)

As much as we "blame" the EP for not granting autocephally to the OCA to fix the jurisdictional mess in North America, why does Russia want to keep control of the Church in Ukraine?  It is a separate country now, they should just grant them autocephally.  The other Orthodox Churches there in schism will fall in line quickly if they are allowed to govern themselves.

I agree, Moscow seems to want it both ways regarding Ukraine but this is a volatile subject which can really inflame any thread quickly.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Andrew21091 on March 13, 2013, 09:32:28 PM
May God grant His Holiness Pope Francis I many years!
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 13, 2013, 09:34:08 PM
I agree, Moscow seems to want it both ways regarding Ukraine but this is a volatile subject which can really inflame any thread quickly.

And why should any Orthodox care about what the Roman Catholic Church does with her communion of Churches?  Do we want the Vatican to meddle with the North American jurisdictional issue?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: WPM on March 13, 2013, 09:38:07 PM
(I don't know - its basically just whatever happens alongside and parallel to the event) ...
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Ioannis Climacus on March 13, 2013, 10:19:03 PM
Pope Francis I to resign (http://www.theonion.com/video/pope-francis-resigns,31660/)

Well, that was quick.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Asteriktos on March 13, 2013, 10:28:18 PM
Good luck!
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Shiny on March 13, 2013, 10:36:12 PM
Pope Francis I to resign (http://www.theonion.com/video/pope-francis-resigns,31660/)

Well, that was quick.
She's pretty.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Asteriktos on March 13, 2013, 10:46:39 PM
Pope Francis I to resign (http://www.theonion.com/video/pope-francis-resigns,31660/)

Well, that was quick.
She's pretty.

Datable. What digits she use?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: podkarpatska on March 13, 2013, 10:50:17 PM
I agree, Moscow seems to want it both ways regarding Ukraine but this is a volatile subject which can really inflame any thread quickly.

And why should any Orthodox care about what the Roman Catholic Church does with her communion of Churches?  Do we want the Vatican to meddle with the North American jurisdictional issue?

We care because the issue of  the treatment of the Eastern Catholic Churches by the Church of Rome and the very nature of their relationship with Rome, Rome hashas been more than troublesome to the Orthodox. The issues go back to the very heart of the root causes of the Great Schism, the failures of Florence, and the impacts of the various Unia - most particularly the presence of a "sui juris" eastern Church united with Rome (the UGCC) (I want to use the academic term to denote them but it can not be used here.)  within historically Orthodox territory. (Herein the successor to the Russian Empire).

It is difficult to fathom from the perspective of the modern west, but to us these issues are real and always in the front of any mutual discussions among Rome and the Orthodox.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 13, 2013, 11:04:31 PM
Lord spare us.

From what?  Its not our communion.  I just want my old friends in the UGCC to be happy.
unfortunately the UGCC springs from that strain of Ukrainianism (Українство) which will never be happy, unless the whole world swallows their mythology, based as much (if not more) on hate of Russia as love of Ukraine.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 13, 2013, 11:04:31 PM
And Maduro, president of Venezuela, made a pronouncement saying that the new pope was elected because Hugo Chavez influenced Jesus in Heaven to choose a South-American. Said that with a serious, plain face, no shame at all.
http://www.estadao.com.br/noticias/internacional,maduro-diz-que-chavez-pode-ter-influenciado-eleicao-de-papa,1008320,0.htm


Maybe it was a LOOOOOOONG distance call. :D
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 13, 2013, 11:04:31 PM
And Maduro, president of Venezuela, made a pronouncement saying that the new pope was elected because Hugo Chavez influenced Jesus in Heaven to choose a South-American. Said that with a serious, plain face, no shame at all.
http://www.estadao.com.br/noticias/internacional,maduro-diz-que-chavez-pode-ter-influenciado-eleicao-de-papa,1008320,0.htm


Wow. Mauduro is more infalliblle than the Pope.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 13, 2013, 11:04:31 PM
Pope Francis I to resign (http://www.theonion.com/video/pope-francis-resigns,31660/)

Well, that was quick.
Haha I love The Onion.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Fabio Leite on March 13, 2013, 11:06:15 PM
The Pope, then Cardinal, taking public transportation for pastoral visits.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: podkarpatska on March 13, 2013, 11:10:47 PM
This is too good not to post...

"Simply by taking a new name — one no pope has ever used — Bergoglio might also be sending a message that change is on the way for the church. There is a strong tradition in the church of taking names of previous popes. John Paul I, in 1978, broke with tradition when he combined the names of men who preceded him as bishop of Rome. Before that, one has to go back more than a thousand years, to Pope Lando of the early 10th century, to find a pope who took an entirely new name." http://m.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/pope-francis-his-name-reflects-his-ministry-for-the-poor/2013/03/13/4a2cc8ce-8c27-11e2-9f54-f3fdd70acad2_story.html

Really? Pope Lando? .....

(http://images.wikia.com/starwars/images/0/0a/Lando_smoothie.jpg)



Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 13, 2013, 11:15:42 PM
This is too good not to post...

"Simply by taking a new name — one no pope has ever used — Bergoglio might also be sending a message that change is on the way for the church. There is a strong tradition in the church of taking names of previous popes. John Paul I, in 1978, broke with tradition when he combined the names of men who preceded him as bishop of Rome. Before that, one has to go back more than a thousand years, to Pope Lando of the early 10th century, to find a pope who took an entirely new name." http://m.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/pope-francis-his-name-reflects-his-ministry-for-the-poor/2013/03/13/4a2cc8ce-8c27-11e2-9f54-f3fdd70acad2_story.html

Really? Pope Lando? .....

(http://images.wikia.com/starwars/images/0/0a/Lando_smoothie.jpg)





I have been advocating for Pope Lando II.  My cries went unheard  :'(
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: John Larocque on March 13, 2013, 11:33:29 PM
http://www.anglicanink.com/article/francis-i-friend-argentine-anglicans

Apparently not so keen on Anglicans swimming the Tiber.

Quote
Anglican Archbishop Gregory Venables:

Many are asking me what Jorge Bergoglio is really like. He is much more of a Christian, Christ centered and Spirit filled, than a mere churchman. He believes the Bible as it is written. I have been with him on many occasions and he always makes me sit next to him and invariably makes me take part and often do what he as Cardinal should have done. He is consistently humble and wise, outstandingly gifted yet a common man. He is no fool and speaks out very quietly yet clearly when necessary. He called me to have breakfast with him one morning and told me very clearly that the Ordinariate was quite unnecessary and that the church needs us as Anglicans. I consider this to be an inspired appointment not because he is a close and personal friend but because of who he is In Christ. Pray for him.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Deacon Lance on March 13, 2013, 11:53:11 PM
Really? Pope Lando? .....

Sure, he was the Archbishop of Bespin in Anoat before election.  He was infamous for his promotion of scoundrels and scruffy looking nerf-herders to the cardinalate. :D
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: William on March 14, 2013, 01:06:02 AM
Mass under Pope Francis:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3RJK0yULkCY#!

I guess I won't be tempted into going back anytime soon...
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Shiny on March 14, 2013, 01:15:17 AM
Mass under Pope Francis:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3RJK0yULkCY#!

I guess I won't be tempted into going back anytime soon...
LOL.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 14, 2013, 01:17:30 AM
Mass under Pope Francis:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3RJK0yULkCY#!

I guess I won't be tempted into going back anytime soon...

Ah, I see you've been hanging out around the SSPX circles.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Nephi on March 14, 2013, 01:33:39 AM
Mass under Pope Francis:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3RJK0yULkCY#!

I guess I won't be tempted into going back anytime soon...

Misa de Ninos... children's mass?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Gebre Menfes Kidus on March 14, 2013, 01:55:40 AM
Congratulations to my Catholic brothers and sisters on the election of their new Pope. This is a joyous day for Catholics and a proud day for Latin America. My prayers are with Pope Francis and the Catholic Church. St. Fancis of Assissi is one of my spiritual heroes! So I rejoice to see that this new Pope is committed to following the example of St. Francis, prioritizing the poor and urging us to seek God with humility, love, and compassion for all people. As an Orthodox Christian, I certainly recognize that there are some serious doctrinal differences between Orthodoxy, Catholicism, and Protestantism. But I truly believe that where Christ is preeminent, where the gospel is preached, and where the Nicene Creed is professed, there is indeed a Christian brotherhood – even though that brotherhood is imperfect and yet fully realized. But as I observe the joy and optimism of my Catholic brethren today, I rejoice with them and share their hope that Pope Francis will be a force for good and a stalwart defender of those ancient Christian values upon which true compassion, authentic justice, and real humanity are predicated.

May God grant Pope Francis many years!


Selam
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 14, 2013, 02:01:53 AM
The funniest takeaway I have for this day is that the reaction of the rabid ultra-traditionalist Roman Catholic crowd makes Isa look like a papist  :D ;D :D ;D :D

Seriously, they call themselves Roman Catholics and talk that way?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Shiny on March 14, 2013, 02:06:07 AM
The funniest takeaway I have for this day is that the reaction of the rabid ultra-traditionalist Roman Catholic crowd makes Isa look like a papist  :D ;D :D ;D :D

Seriously, they call themselves Roman Catholics and talk that way?
Can you please link to these reactions?

The YouTube comments are disgusting as usual
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 14, 2013, 02:09:11 AM
The funniest takeaway I have for this day is that the reaction of the rabid ultra-traditionalist Roman Catholic crowd makes Isa look like a papist  :D ;D :D ;D :D

Seriously, they call themselves Roman Catholics and talk that way?
Can you please link to these reactions?

The YouTube comments are disgusting as usual

Here's the premiere traddie blog: http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ironchapman on March 14, 2013, 02:14:56 AM
That doesn't sound like Peter the Roman to me.

:P

Maybe because his name isn't Peter and he's not from Rome?

He's about as un-Peter* and un-Roman as you can get while still being a Catholic.

*=And by that I mean his names are George and Francis, and he was from an order started by a guy named Ignatius.

Hundreds of millions of Catholics do not have the name Peter, and are from a multitude of places other than Rome.  And yes, he's a Jesuit, many of whom are extremely "liberal" and many of whom are quite "conservative".  What, pray tell, is your point?

Maybe that reference to some St Malaky (or Malarky?) prophesy about the last pope to be called Peter the Roman?

Your guess is as good as mine.  

Sorry for the late response, but that's exactly what I meant. I was making a joke about the prophecy of Malaky (which I believe to be bunk). I didn't realize my joke would flop like this. My apologies.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Basil 320 on March 14, 2013, 02:57:33 AM
I imagine the newly elected Pope, Francis I, has a relationship with His Eminence Metropolitan Tarasios of Buenos Aries, the Holy Metropolis of South America, a see of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople----Metropolitan Tarasios is a former Deacon to Patriarch Bartholomew, and an American from the State of Texas.  I'll guess he will be part of the Eastern Orthodox delegation to the enthronement of Pope Francis I.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Ansgar on March 14, 2013, 06:01:55 AM
Does anybody know anything about Pope Francis´relationship with the military junta? I don't entirely trust the newspapers.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: mike on March 14, 2013, 06:18:55 AM
I imagine the newly elected Pope, Francis I, has a relationship with His Eminence Metropolitan Tarasios of Buenos Aries, the Holy Metropolis of South America, a see of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople-

I know he has good relations with Russians - Bishop John and Metropolitan Plato.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Basil 320 on March 14, 2013, 07:16:21 AM
Hum, that's important to know; His Holiness is close friends with the Ukrainian Catholic Patriarch too--I wonder how these two relationships affect his attitude toward the Orthodox Church.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: podkarpatska on March 14, 2013, 08:13:45 AM
And Maduro, president of Venezuela, made a pronouncement saying that the new pope was elected because Hugo Chavez influenced Jesus in Heaven to choose a South-American. Said that with a serious, plain face, no shame at all.


Quote
"We know that our commander ascended to Heaven and is face-to-face with Christ", said Maduro in a literary fair in Caracas. "Something influenced the choice of a south-american, someone new arrived at Christ's side and told him: 'Well, it seems to us it's time for South-America".

"He (Chávez) can summon a Constituent Assembly in heaven at any time to change the Church on Earth, so that only people of Christ can govern the world", added Maduro.

http://www.estadao.com.br/noticias/internacional,maduro-diz-que-chavez-pode-ter-influenciado-eleicao-de-papa,1008320,0.htm


I wonder what the late Hugo's Iranian pals think about that comment?  Lol!
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: podkarpatska on March 14, 2013, 08:15:47 AM
Really? Pope Lando? .....

Sure, he was the Archbishop of Bespin in Anoat before election.  He was infamous for his promotion of scoundrels and scruffy looking nerf-herders to the cardinalate. :D

In the end a good guy though!
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Peter J on March 14, 2013, 09:24:31 AM
Lord spare us.

From what?  Its not our communion.  I just want my old friends in the UGCC to be happy.
unfortunately the UGCC springs from that strain of Ukrainianism (Українство) which will never be happy, unless the whole world swallows their mythology, based as much (if not more) on hate of Russia as love of Ukraine.

Because we all know that no Russians ever hate Ukraine.

[/sarcasm]
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Peter J on March 14, 2013, 09:40:13 AM
The funniest takeaway I have for this day is that the reaction of the rabid ultra-traditionalist Roman Catholic crowd makes Isa look like a papist  :D ;D :D ;D :D

Seriously, they call themselves Roman Catholics and talk that way?

Now Choy, you know someone doesn't have to have an Italian accent to be a Roman Catholic. :wag finger:
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Schultz on March 14, 2013, 09:59:29 AM
Does anybody know anything about Pope Francis´relationship with the military junta? I don't entirely trust the newspapers.

There have been many accusations.  There has been no actual proof offered that I know of. Note, it's not that "proof" has been discredited.  There's just been nothing offered more than, "Well, he could have been complicit."

Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Marc1152 on March 14, 2013, 10:00:55 AM
We are taking care of an eight year old girl this week while her parents are out of town. At breakfast this morning I asked her:

"What do you think of the new Pope?"

Silence...silence...silence

"What's a Pope?"

"Oh he is in charge of the Roman Catholic Church, the one your grandparents belong to"

"Why is there a new one?"

"The Pope before him retired, he was getting too old"

"I see. Maybe he wanted to do something else with his life"

Silence...silence....silence

Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 14, 2013, 10:03:14 AM
I imagine the newly elected Pope, Francis I, has a relationship with His Eminence Metropolitan Tarasios of Buenos Aries, the Holy Metropolis of South America, a see of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople----Metropolitan Tarasios is a former Deacon to Patriarch Bartholomew, and an American from the State of Texas.  I'll guess he will be part of the Eastern Orthodox delegation to the enthronement of Pope Francis I.

Remembering how important it is here that we refer to clergy with their proper title, etc. I'd just like to note that the new Pope is Pope FRANCIS.  He is not Francis I, although he is, to date the first Pope with the name of Francis.  In order for him to be Francis I, there must first be a Francis II--and there isn't yet.  So...Pope Francis...........please  ;).  (Apologies if this has already been stated previously on this thread, but if it has it obviously bears repeating  ;D.)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Schultz on March 14, 2013, 10:10:38 AM
I imagine the newly elected Pope, Francis I, has a relationship with His Eminence Metropolitan Tarasios of Buenos Aries, the Holy Metropolis of South America, a see of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople----Metropolitan Tarasios is a former Deacon to Patriarch Bartholomew, and an American from the State of Texas.  I'll guess he will be part of the Eastern Orthodox delegation to the enthronement of Pope Francis I.

Remembering how important it is here that we refer to clergy with their proper title, etc. I'd just like to note that the new Pope is Pope FRANCIS.  He is not Francis I, although he is, to date the first Pope with the name of Francis.  In order for him to be Francis I, there must first be a Francis II--and there isn't yet.  So...Pope Francis...........please  ;).  (Apologies if this has already been stated previously on this thread, but if it has it obviously bears repeating  ;D.)

The adding of "I" at the end of his name is driving me crazy, too.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 14, 2013, 10:10:53 AM
I just want to thank all of the Orthodox Christians on this forum for their kind and congratulatory words concerning our new Pope. You have all shown great grace and understanding about what a special time this is for Catholics.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 14, 2013, 10:19:41 AM
I just want to thank all of the Orthodox Christians on this forum for their kind and congratulatory words concerning our new Pope. You have all shown great grace and understanding about what a special time this is for Catholics.

I'll second that!  :)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Fabio Leite on March 14, 2013, 10:23:06 AM
I was just thinking that all the popes in the 21st century are 20th century men, of course. I wonder how the popes in the end of the century, who will be the kids around us today, will make their announcements.

@urbietorbi Habms #Papum ! Li Yang now #Pope YOLO! LOL kidding... Francis IV really.

and all the kids with neuroimplants connected to the EtherealNet will roll their eyes on how old-fashioned and traditionalist that is.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Schultz on March 14, 2013, 10:40:45 AM
LOL.  They elected a Jesuit.
Yeah I got a laugh out of that as well. Maybe that's what the Curia needs.

When I pointed this out, my wife told me to shut up because I wasn't RC anymore and was not allowed to go on one of my patented rants.  I've long been no fan of the Jesuits (even as an RC) and the mere mention of them tends to get me going.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Peter J on March 14, 2013, 11:01:07 AM
Lord Almighty - reading a particular forum one would think that the Anti-Christ has taken over the Papacy and we are soon to be getting wummin priests, dancing masses, no fancy tat and persecution of all faithful priests celebrating the traditional mass.

Also he apparently destroyed the Argentinian Church.

THE WORLD IS DOOMED!  DOOMED I SAY!

Fisheaters?
You have to understand that we are all just a little frustrated. I mean, proper liturgy should not depend on if we happen to have the right Pope in Rome.

How about going out there and actually doing something?  I mean, there are problems with Liturgy with the Orthodox as well, but we don't complain about it as much as traddies would.  And to think the Orthodox outnumber the traddies.

While it's nice to think that we have only as many problems with our liturgy as the Orthodox do, sadly it isn't true.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 14, 2013, 11:01:40 AM
LOL.  They elected a Jesuit.
Yeah I got a laugh out of that as well. Maybe that's what the Curia needs.

When I pointed this out, my wife told me to shut up because I wasn't RC anymore and was not allowed to go on one of my patented rants.  I've long been no fan of the Jesuits (even as an RC) and the mere mention of them tends to get me going.

I've got to admit that as gracious as people have been here about our (Catholic) new Pope, it does get a little irksome sometimes to read those comments from some people who, as Orthodox, think they know what the Catholic Church needs to do, how it should reform itself, etc. more so and better than the Catholic Church and its members and hierarchs do.  It's a little bit like me, officious jerk that I can be at times, telling my sister, who doesn't live with me and whom I love dearly, how to run her house and her life.  She has every right to tell me, "You know, thanks for your concern, but it's really none of your business  ;)."  (Usually though, she's a little more patient with me, and just chooses to ignore me  ;D ;D.)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Peter J on March 14, 2013, 11:40:56 AM
Not that its happening, but would a Byzantine/Eastern Catholic Pope help or hurt the overall East/West relations?
Depends on which "sui juris" he came from, ranging from Melchite (the best) to the UGCC (worst).

Care to elaborate?
Melkites and Antiochian Orthodox have the best relations of all the Vatican caused schisms.  

I'd like to nominate this for "Oversimplification of the Month".
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 14, 2013, 12:35:27 PM
While it's nice to think that we have only as many problems with our liturgy as the Orthodox do, sadly it isn't true.

Oh there are those out there.  Not every Orthodox parish is a hyperdox community like my parish.  One EC priest was telling me of the story of 10-minute funerals and such.  He said despite Latinizations, EC parishes in that area look more Orthodox than the Orthodox.  And I believe him.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 14, 2013, 12:37:32 PM
I was just thinking that all the popes in the 21st century are 20th century men, of course. I wonder how the popes in the end of the century, who will be the kids around us today, will make their announcements.

@urbietorbi Habms #Papum ! Li Yang now #Pope YOLO! LOL kidding... Francis IV really.

and all the kids with neuroimplants connected to the EtherealNet will roll their eyes on how old-fashioned and traditionalist that is.

There will no longer be a conclave then.  Cardinals from wherever they are around the world will just tweet their votes to @conclave.  The white smoke and black smoke will then be just a 3D image of a smoke displaying on people's holo-projectors from wherever they are.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 14, 2013, 12:38:36 PM
I just want to thank all of the Orthodox Christians on this forum for their kind and congratulatory words concerning our new Pope. You have all shown great grace and understanding about what a special time this is for Catholics.

I really find it funny that the Orthodox has been generally more warm and welcoming of the new Pope than some Roman Catholics.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Basil 320 on March 14, 2013, 12:40:48 PM
I just want to thank all of the Orthodox Christians on this forum for their kind and congratulatory words concerning our new Pope. You have all shown great grace and understanding about what a special time this is for Catholics.

I'll second that!  :)

I feel the traditions surrounding the election of the announcement of the Pope's election to be most inspiring!
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Fabio Leite on March 14, 2013, 01:13:07 PM
In the first picture, the hierarchs of the Antiochian Church, Don Damaskinos and Don Siluan with Archbishop Jorge, now Pope Francis.

In the second picture, the Pope taking the bus with the "boys" to his first Mass.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Monk Vasyl on March 14, 2013, 01:14:25 PM
The Papal Mass just ended with the choir singing "Tu Es Petrus"
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 14, 2013, 01:21:22 PM
LOL.  They elected a Jesuit.
Yeah I got a laugh out of that as well. Maybe that's what the Curia needs.

When I pointed this out, my wife told me to shut up because I wasn't RC anymore and was not allowed to go on one of my patented rants.  I've long been no fan of the Jesuits (even as an RC) and the mere mention of them tends to get me going.

I've got to admit that as gracious as people have been here about our (Catholic) new Pope, it does get a little irksome sometimes to read those comments from some people who, as Orthodox, think they know what the Catholic Church needs to do, how it should reform itself, etc. more so and better than the Catholic Church and its members and hierarchs do.  It's a little bit like me, officious jerk that I can be at times, telling my sister, who doesn't live with me and whom I love dearly, how to run her house and her life.  She has every right to tell me, "You know, thanks for your concern, but it's really none of your business  ;)."  (Usually though, she's a little more patient with me, and just chooses to ignore me  ;D ;D.)
Yes, but as I posted above, the Jesuits have a nasty habit of moving in telling us our business.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 14, 2013, 01:21:22 PM
Maybe this is just me being a Roman Catholic, but I am starting to become impressed by what a humble and holy man Pope Francis appears to be.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 14, 2013, 01:21:22 PM
Lord spare us.

From what?  Its not our communion.  I just want my old friends in the UGCC to be happy.
unfortunately the UGCC springs from that strain of Ukrainianism (Українство) which will never be happy, unless the whole world swallows their mythology, based as much (if not more) on hate of Russia as love of Ukraine.

Because we all know that no Russians ever hate Ukraine.

[/sarcasm]
Sure. Lots.  And if the Ukrainian chauvinists want to take on the Russian chauvinists, they are free to do so.  It would be a shame if Ukraine got crushed in the process, as the Russian chavinists have shown that they are ready, willing, and able to play for keeps.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 14, 2013, 01:21:22 PM
I just want to thank all of the Orthodox Christians on this forum for their kind and congratulatory words concerning our new Pope. You have all shown great grace and understanding about what a special time this is for Catholics.

I really find it funny that the Orthodox has been generally more warm and welcoming of the new Pope than some Roman Catholics.
Initially, some of us traddies may have overreacted a bit.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Shiny on March 14, 2013, 01:26:23 PM
LOL.  They elected a Jesuit.
Yeah I got a laugh out of that as well. Maybe that's what the Curia needs.

When I pointed this out, my wife told me to shut up because I wasn't RC anymore and was not allowed to go on one of my patented rants.  I've long been no fan of the Jesuits (even as an RC) and the mere mention of them tends to get me going.

I've got to admit that as gracious as people have been here about our (Catholic) new Pope, it does get a little irksome sometimes to read those comments from some people who, as Orthodox, think they know what the Catholic Church needs to do, how it should reform itself, etc. more so and better than the Catholic Church and its members and hierarchs do.  It's a little bit like me, officious jerk that I can be at times, telling my sister, who doesn't live with me and whom I love dearly, how to run her house and her life.  She has every right to tell me, "You know, thanks for your concern, but it's really none of your business  ;)."  (Usually though, she's a little more patient with me, and just chooses to ignore me  ;D ;D.)
The fact that the Vatican needs to reform itself is all the more telling about its Catholicity.;D
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Fabio Leite on March 14, 2013, 01:33:38 PM
I just want to thank all of the Orthodox Christians on this forum for their kind and congratulatory words concerning our new Pope. You have all shown great grace and understanding about what a special time this is for Catholics.

I really find it funny that the Orthodox has been generally more warm and welcoming of the new Pope than some Roman Catholics.
Initially, some of us traddies may have overreacted a bit.

From what I read, he seems to be traditional in matters of morality and culture, but moderate liturgically, meaning he is more than willing to accept alternative masses as long as not parodical.

His attitude of treating hierarchical orders as a duty and a responsibility and not as a way of putting himself above laity and colleagues is a good example for all hierarchs. Of any church. :)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: James2 on March 14, 2013, 01:36:02 PM
I imagine the newly elected Pope, Francis I, has a relationship with His Eminence Metropolitan Tarasios of Buenos Aries, the Holy Metropolis of South America, a see of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople----Metropolitan Tarasios is a former Deacon to Patriarch Bartholomew, and an American from the State of Texas.  I'll guess he will be part of the Eastern Orthodox delegation to the enthronement of Pope Francis I.

Remembering how important it is here that we refer to clergy with their proper title, etc. I'd just like to note that the new Pope is Pope FRANCIS.  He is not Francis I, although he is, to date the first Pope with the name of Francis.  In order for him to be Francis I, there must first be a Francis II--and there isn't yet.  So...Pope Francis...........please  ;).  (Apologies if this has already been stated previously on this thread, but if it has it obviously bears repeating  ;D.)

The adding of "I" at the end of his name is driving me crazy, too.

The use of the "I" must be up to the pope himself to decide.  Cardinal Luciani did use it when he became John Paul I.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 14, 2013, 01:44:48 PM
I imagine the newly elected Pope, Francis I, has a relationship with His Eminence Metropolitan Tarasios of Buenos Aries, the Holy Metropolis of South America, a see of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople----Metropolitan Tarasios is a former Deacon to Patriarch Bartholomew, and an American from the State of Texas.  I'll guess he will be part of the Eastern Orthodox delegation to the enthronement of Pope Francis I.

Remembering how important it is here that we refer to clergy with their proper title, etc. I'd just like to note that the new Pope is Pope FRANCIS.  He is not Francis I, although he is, to date the first Pope with the name of Francis.  In order for him to be Francis I, there must first be a Francis II--and there isn't yet.  So...Pope Francis...........please  ;).  (Apologies if this has already been stated previously on this thread, but if it has it obviously bears repeating  ;D.)

The adding of "I" at the end of his name is driving me crazy, too.

The use of the "I" must be up to the pope himself to decide.  Cardinal Luciani did use it when he became John Paul I.

This ought to settle the matter:

Quote
From the Vatican press office (news.va):

 "The choice of his name Francis, after St. Francis of Assisi, strongly recalls the saint's evangelical spirituality and radical poverty. His papal name is simply 'Francis', not 'Francis I', since he is the first pontiff to bear that name. If after him another pontiff chooses that name then he will be 'Francis I'.”
My emphases.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Cyrillic on March 14, 2013, 01:46:49 PM
His real papal name is Franciscus, btw.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 14, 2013, 01:54:18 PM
His real papal name is Franciscus, btw.

And Joseph Ratzinger was Pope Benedictus XVI.  In English we call(ed) him Benedict.  In English we will call Franciscus, Francis.  Sheesh  ::).
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Monk Vasyl on March 14, 2013, 01:54:40 PM
His real papal name is Franciscus, btw.

For those in Rome and Italy, for that matter, its Papa Francisco.  Francisco has a better sound than Francis or Franciscus.  In the movie "Brother Sun, Sister Moon" they called him Francisco.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Cyrillic on March 14, 2013, 02:28:09 PM
His real papal name is Franciscus, btw.

And Joseph Ratzinger was Pope Benedictus XVI.  In English we call(ed) him Benedict.  In English we will call Franciscus, Francis.  Sheesh  ::).

I was just playing with you. No need to get all upset. Sheesh  ::)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Romaios on March 14, 2013, 02:30:49 PM
His real papal name is Franciscus, btw.

For those in Rome and Italy, for that matter, its Papa Francisco.  Francisco has a better sound than Francis or Franciscus.  In the movie "Brother Sun, Sister Moon" they called him Francisco.

Francesco.  :P
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 14, 2013, 02:31:07 PM
LOL.  They elected a Jesuit.
Yeah I got a laugh out of that as well. Maybe that's what the Curia needs.

When I pointed this out, my wife told me to shut up because I wasn't RC anymore and was not allowed to go on one of my patented rants.  I've long been no fan of the Jesuits (even as an RC) and the mere mention of them tends to get me going.

I've got to admit that as gracious as people have been here about our (Catholic) new Pope, it does get a little irksome sometimes to read those comments from some people who, as Orthodox, think they know what the Catholic Church needs to do, how it should reform itself, etc. more so and better than the Catholic Church and its members and hierarchs do.  It's a little bit like me, officious jerk that I can be at times, telling my sister, who doesn't live with me and whom I love dearly, how to run her house and her life.  She has every right to tell me, "You know, thanks for your concern, but it's really none of your business  ;)."  (Usually though, she's a little more patient with me, and just chooses to ignore me  ;D ;D.)
The fact that the Vatican needs to reform itself is all the more telling about its Catholicity.;D

Look to repairing your own house (if indeed you are Orthodox) before commenting on any repairs mine needs.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: serb1389 on March 14, 2013, 02:33:01 PM
Hey guys, I know we're talking very colloquially about the Pope here, but we still need to be respectful of his office & who he is, even if only because it's just plain ole' polite.  

Please refer to His Holiness with all the proper titles.  (p.s. we've had an issue with this in multiple threads recently, so please consider this a warning to all)

 :police:
:police:
:police:
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 14, 2013, 02:34:10 PM
His real papal name is Franciscus, btw.

And Joseph Ratzinger was Pope Benedictus XVI.  In English we call(ed) him Benedict.  In English we will call Franciscus, Francis.  Sheesh  ::).

I was just playing with you. No need to get all upset. Sheesh  ::)

Okay.  Sheesh  ::)
 ;D

There are some people whose mission in life on this board seems to be to take any and every shot (cheap or otherwise) they can at the Catholic Church, at any and every opportunity.  It's boorish and tiresome.  Sometimes, especially when people make jokes without using emoticons, it's difficult to tell whether they're "playing" or are dead serious.  My apologies to you if I over-reacted.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Cyrillic on March 14, 2013, 02:38:12 PM
It's OK  :)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Asteriktos on March 14, 2013, 02:39:17 PM
I really find it funny that the Orthodox has been generally more warm and welcoming of the new Pope than some Roman Catholics.

Catholics should become more ecumenical and peace-making like the Orthodox!  ;D
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 14, 2013, 02:43:31 PM
I really find it funny that the Orthodox has been generally more warm and welcoming of the new Pope than some Roman Catholics.

Catholics should become more ecumenical and peace-making like the Orthodox!  ;D

 :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 14, 2013, 02:46:55 PM
I just want to thank all of the Orthodox Christians on this forum for their kind and congratulatory words concerning our new Pope. You have all shown great grace and understanding about what a special time this is for Catholics.

I really find it funny that the Orthodox has been generally more warm and welcoming of the new Pope than some Roman Catholics.
"You can please some of the people some of the time, all of the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time, but you can never please all of the people all of the time."
Abraham Lincoln
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) on March 14, 2013, 02:59:22 PM
His real papal name is Franciscus, btw.

For those in Rome and Italy, for that matter, its Papa Francisco.  Francisco has a better sound than Francis or Franciscus.  In the movie "Brother Sun, Sister Moon" they called him Francisco.

Francesco.  :P

That's true. Francisco is Spanish.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 14, 2013, 02:59:31 PM
I just want to thank all of the Orthodox Christians on this forum for their kind and congratulatory words concerning our new Pope. You have all shown great grace and understanding about what a special time this is for Catholics.

I really find it funny that the Orthodox has been generally more warm and welcoming of the new Pope than some Roman Catholics.
"You can please some of the people some of the time, all of the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time, but you can never please all of the people all of the time."
Abraham Lincoln

I'm still wondering why they want to stay Roman Catholics.  When they call me a schismatic I always remind them that at least we Orthodox are honest about what we think about the Pope.  We don't pretend to be in communion with someone we believe holds a heretical position.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 14, 2013, 03:03:47 PM
I just want to thank all of the Orthodox Christians on this forum for their kind and congratulatory words concerning our new Pope. You have all shown great grace and understanding about what a special time this is for Catholics.

I really find it funny that the Orthodox has been generally more warm and welcoming of the new Pope than some Roman Catholics.
"You can please some of the people some of the time, all of the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time, but you can never please all of the people all of the time."
Abraham Lincoln

I'm still wondering why they want to stay Roman Catholics.  When they call me a schismatic I always remind them that at least we Orthodox are honest about what we think about the Pope.  We don't pretend to be in communion with someone we believe holds a heretical position.

Well, I guess maybe you ought to go over to Fisheaters or Rorate-Caeli or wherever and ask them directly.  Let us know what you find out. ;)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 14, 2013, 03:06:01 PM
I just want to thank all of the Orthodox Christians on this forum for their kind and congratulatory words concerning our new Pope. You have all shown great grace and understanding about what a special time this is for Catholics.

I really find it funny that the Orthodox has been generally more warm and welcoming of the new Pope than some Roman Catholics.
"You can please some of the people some of the time, all of the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time, but you can never please all of the people all of the time."
Abraham Lincoln

I'm still wondering why they want to stay Roman Catholics.  When they call me a schismatic I always remind them that at least we Orthodox are honest about what we think about the Pope.  We don't pretend to be in communion with someone we believe holds a heretical position.

Well, I guess maybe you ought to go over to Fisheaters or Rorate-Caeli or wherever and ask them directly.  Let us know what you find out. ;)

Nah, it's about time to move on and get this behind me.  I wasn't really thinking about them much until the rabbid traddies on my facebook started posting their thoughts on the new Pope of Rome.  I've unfriended them, thinking Lent is coming and I don't need to be provoked that way.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 14, 2013, 03:08:20 PM
I just want to thank all of the Orthodox Christians on this forum for their kind and congratulatory words concerning our new Pope. You have all shown great grace and understanding about what a special time this is for Catholics.

I really find it funny that the Orthodox has been generally more warm and welcoming of the new Pope than some Roman Catholics.
"You can please some of the people some of the time, all of the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time, but you can never please all of the people all of the time."
Abraham Lincoln

I'm still wondering why they want to stay Roman Catholics.  When they call me a schismatic I always remind them that at least we Orthodox are honest about what we think about the Pope.  We don't pretend to be in communion with someone we believe holds a heretical position.

Well, I guess maybe you ought to go over to Fisheaters or Rorate-Caeli or wherever and ask them directly.  Let us know what you find out. ;)

Nah, it's about time to move on and get this behind me. 


Praise be to God!
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 14, 2013, 03:16:05 PM
Maybe this is just me being a Roman Catholic, but I am starting to become impressed by what a humble and holy man Pope Francis appears to be.
Like Pat. Pavle of blessed memory (and obvious glorification).
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_6WRcJM7SGZY/SeCTrRjHn3I/AAAAAAAABdg/UMtBWmYGKes/s400/1193777798-340b7-106kb.jpg)(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_qpE5hNwi618/SwQeTBl72YI/AAAAAAAAC2c/V2S8NooAKrY/s1600/pavle2.jpg)  
Btw, Rush Limbaugh had a nice stretch on your Pope Francis.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 14, 2013, 03:16:06 PM
His real papal name is Franciscus, btw.

For those in Rome and Italy, for that matter, its Papa Francisco.  Francisco has a better sound than Francis or Franciscus.  In the movie "Brother Sun, Sister Moon" they called him Francisco.

Francesco.  :P

That's true. Francisco is Spanish.
So's he.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 14, 2013, 03:16:06 PM
I was just thinking that all the popes in the 21st century are 20th century men, of course. I wonder how the popes in the end of the century, who will be the kids around us today, will make their announcements.

@urbietorbi Habms #Papum ! Li Yang now #Pope YOLO! LOL kidding... Francis IV really.

and all the kids with neuroimplants connected to the EtherealNet will roll their eyes on how old-fashioned and traditionalist that is.

There will no longer be a conclave then.  Cardinals from wherever they are around the world will just tweet their votes to @conclave.  The white smoke and black smoke will then be just a 3D image of a smoke displaying on people's holo-projectors from wherever they are.
(http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/577874_555336131153088_1035548107_n.jpg)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: William on March 14, 2013, 03:42:50 PM
Choy, I looked at fisheaters. But I don't know any SSPXers to "hang" with irl, unfortunately.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 14, 2013, 04:08:29 PM
Choy, I looked at fisheaters. But I don't know any SSPXers to "hang" with irl, unfortunately.

Thank God for that.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 14, 2013, 04:09:59 PM
(http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/556781_454100617993239_2033702092_n.jpg)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: William on March 14, 2013, 04:10:31 PM
Choy, I looked at fisheaters. But I don't know any SSPXers to "hang" with irl, unfortunately.

Thank God for that.
Choy doesn't like SSPX?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: J Michael on March 14, 2013, 04:29:59 PM
(http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/556781_454100617993239_2033702092_n.jpg)

מזל טוב
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Peter J on March 14, 2013, 04:31:58 PM
I really find it funny that the Orthodox has been generally more warm and welcoming of the new Pope than some Roman Catholics.

Catholics should become more ecumenical and peace-making like the Orthodox!  ;D

True.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Peter J on March 14, 2013, 04:33:24 PM
I just want to thank all of the Orthodox Christians on this forum for their kind and congratulatory words concerning our new Pope. You have all shown great grace and understanding about what a special time this is for Catholics.

I really find it funny that the Orthodox has been generally more warm and welcoming of the new Pope than some Roman Catholics.
"You can please some of the people some of the time, all of the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time, but you can never please all of the people all of the time."
Abraham Lincoln

I'm still wondering why they want to stay Roman Catholics.

Well, it would be difficult to become, say, Ambrosian Catholic (unless one lives in Milan or wants to move there). But some do become Eastern Catholic.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: William on March 14, 2013, 04:38:59 PM
I just want to thank all of the Orthodox Christians on this forum for their kind and congratulatory words concerning our new Pope. You have all shown great grace and understanding about what a special time this is for Catholics.

I really find it funny that the Orthodox has been generally more warm and welcoming of the new Pope than some Roman Catholics.
"You can please some of the people some of the time, all of the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time, but you can never please all of the people all of the time."
Abraham Lincoln

I'm still wondering why they want to stay Roman Catholics.

Well, it would be difficult to become, say, Ambrosian Catholic (unless one lives in Milan or wants to move there). But some do become Eastern Catholic.

Of all the things you could get hung up on...
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Peter J on March 14, 2013, 04:44:15 PM
I just want to thank all of the Orthodox Christians on this forum for their kind and congratulatory words concerning our new Pope. You have all shown great grace and understanding about what a special time this is for Catholics.

I really find it funny that the Orthodox has been generally more warm and welcoming of the new Pope than some Roman Catholics.
"You can please some of the people some of the time, all of the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time, but you can never please all of the people all of the time."
Abraham Lincoln

I'm still wondering why they want to stay Roman Catholics.

Well, it would be difficult to become, say, Ambrosian Catholic (unless one lives in Milan or wants to move there). But some do become Eastern Catholic.

Of all the things you could get hung up on...

You mean if, say, someone was really serious about Ambrosian-Rite Catholicism, they would just move to Milan?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 14, 2013, 04:49:35 PM
I just want to thank all of the Orthodox Christians on this forum for their kind and congratulatory words concerning our new Pope. You have all shown great grace and understanding about what a special time this is for Catholics.

I really find it funny that the Orthodox has been generally more warm and welcoming of the new Pope than some Roman Catholics.
"You can please some of the people some of the time, all of the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time, but you can never please all of the people all of the time."
Abraham Lincoln

I'm still wondering why they want to stay Roman Catholics.

Well, it would be difficult to become, say, Ambrosian Catholic (unless one lives in Milan or wants to move there). But some do become Eastern Catholic.

Ultra-trads believe the Pope is a heretic.  I don't think being anywhere in the communion of Catholic Churches would change that.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Peter J on March 14, 2013, 05:27:08 PM
I just want to thank all of the Orthodox Christians on this forum for their kind and congratulatory words concerning our new Pope. You have all shown great grace and understanding about what a special time this is for Catholics.

I really find it funny that the Orthodox has been generally more warm and welcoming of the new Pope than some Roman Catholics.
"You can please some of the people some of the time, all of the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time, but you can never please all of the people all of the time."
Abraham Lincoln

I'm still wondering why they want to stay Roman Catholics.

Well, it would be difficult to become, say, Ambrosian Catholic (unless one lives in Milan or wants to move there). But some do become Eastern Catholic.

Ultra-trads believe the Pope is a heretic.  I don't think being anywhere in the communion of Catholic Churches would change that.

Ultra-trads who consider the Pope a heretic usually don't stay in communion with him. (Granted, we did recently hear from one who receives communion from a Catholic priest, but I would assume that's rare.)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 14, 2013, 05:42:41 PM
Ultra-trads who consider the Pope a heretic usually don't stay in communion with him. (Granted, we did recently hear from one who receives communion from a Catholic priest, but I would assume that's rare.)

All I have to say to you is... SSPX
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: biro on March 14, 2013, 05:44:16 PM
Weren't they received back into the RCC's fold not too long ago? I realize there are other groups of similar traditionalist ways, but I thought they ended the standoff between the RCC and the SSPX.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 14, 2013, 05:46:32 PM
Weren't they received back into the RCC's fold not too long ago? I realize there are other groups of similar traditionalist ways, but I thought they ended the standoff between the RCC and the SSPX.

No.  Pope Benedict said he will resolve the issue but didn't.  The excommunications were lifted but they still do not have a regular status within the Church.  I think today the SSPX have divided among the Williamson group and the Fellay group.  The Fellay group is the most likely to be regularized with the RCC, the Williamson group, they're just being hypocrites today by pretending they are not sedevacantists.  Most of them are already.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Tallitot on March 14, 2013, 06:03:38 PM
Is he choosing Francis after francis of Assisi or francis Xavier?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 14, 2013, 06:04:01 PM
Is he choosing Francis after francis of Assisi or francis Xavier?

Assisi
Title: The other side of the coin maybe?
Post by: JoeS2 on March 14, 2013, 06:20:56 PM
New Pope Tied to Argentina's Dirty War | Global Research

http://www.globalresearch.ca/new-pope-tied-to-argentinas-dirty-war/5326816
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Benjamin the Red on March 14, 2013, 06:28:04 PM
I imagine the newly elected Pope, Francis I, has a relationship with His Eminence Metropolitan Tarasios of Buenos Aries, the Holy Metropolis of South America, a see of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople----Metropolitan Tarasios is a former Deacon to Patriarch Bartholomew, and an American from the State of Texas.  I'll guess he will be part of the Eastern Orthodox delegation to the enthronement of Pope Francis I.

Remembering how important it is here that we refer to clergy with their proper title, etc. I'd just like to note that the new Pope is Pope FRANCIS.  He is not Francis I, although he is, to date the first Pope with the name of Francis.  In order for him to be Francis I, there must first be a Francis II--and there isn't yet.  So...Pope Francis...........please  ;).  (Apologies if this has already been stated previously on this thread, but if it has it obviously bears repeating  ;D.)

The adding of "I" at the end of his name is driving me crazy, too.

The use of the "I" must be up to the pope himself to decide.  Cardinal Luciani did use it when he became John Paul I.

Truth. Wasn't Pope John Paul I the only Roman Pope in history to explicitly affirm the "I" after his name, the rest of them being conventions (as others took the name)?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Peter J on March 14, 2013, 09:04:18 PM
I just want to thank all of the Orthodox Christians on this forum for their kind and congratulatory words concerning our new Pope. You have all shown great grace and understanding about what a special time this is for Catholics.

I really find it funny that the Orthodox has been generally more warm and welcoming of the new Pope than some Roman Catholics.
"You can please some of the people some of the time, all of the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time, but you can never please all of the people all of the time."
Abraham Lincoln

I'm still wondering why they want to stay Roman Catholics.

Well, it would be difficult to become, say, Ambrosian Catholic (unless one lives in Milan or wants to move there). But some do become Eastern Catholic.

Ultra-trads believe the Pope is a heretic.  I don't think being anywhere in the communion of Catholic Churches would change that.

Ultra-trads who consider the Pope a heretic usually don't stay in communion with him. (Granted, we did recently hear from one who receives communion from a Catholic priest, but I would assume that's rare.)

Ultra-trads who consider the Pope a heretic usually don't stay in communion with him. (Granted, we did recently hear from one who receives communion from a Catholic priest, but I would assume that's rare.)

All I have to say to you is... SSPX

OIC. (Well, hopefully I see now. At first I thought you were asking why people remain Roman-Rite Catholic, then I thought you were talking about sedevacantist.)

I'm not sure how many SSPX fans consider the pope to be a heretic, but I don't know why those people stay in full communion with him.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: #1Sinner on March 14, 2013, 09:17:09 PM
Mass under Pope Francis:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3RJK0yULkCY#!

I guess I won't be tempted into going back anytime soon...

Ah, I see you've been hanging out around the SSPX circles.

You are long on name calling and insults and short on knowledge. "SSPXers" simply want the Church to be what it once was before the Modernists deployed their program of destruction 50 years ago. I wonder how many Orthodox would simply sit back and shut-up as their Church was destroyed by enemies. Traditional Roman Catholics are justifiably furious with what has happened to the Church and now we have a pope who celebrates masses that look like they have more in common with a circus.

Really easy to mouth off from where you are sitting, isn't it?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Shiny on March 14, 2013, 09:23:18 PM
popcorn.gif
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Father H on March 14, 2013, 09:37:34 PM
Mass under Pope Francis:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3RJK0yULkCY#!

I guess I won't be tempted into going back anytime soon...

Ah, I see you've been hanging out around the SSPX circles.

You are long on name calling and insults and short on knowledge. "SSPXers" simply want the Church to be what it once was before the Modernists deployed their program of destruction 50 years ago. I wonder how many Orthodox would simply sit back and shut-up as their Church was destroyed by enemies. Traditional Roman Catholics are justifiably furious with what has happened to the Church and now we have a pope who celebrates masses that look like they have more in common with a circus.

Really easy to mouth off from where you are sitting, isn't it?

It is easy for us to mouth off from where we are sitting (and I hope most fellow Orthodox Christians appreciate that).  Some in the SSPX are a tough crowd, though, with all their videos on JPII and Benedict being the beasts and "antichrist" and all that, and not even talking to others who are still under Rome.  Still, no, we Orthodox would not sit back and shut-up.  But the newly elected pope's future cannot be entirely predicted to the negative by this video, no?         
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: John Larocque on March 14, 2013, 10:14:57 PM
The Anglicanization of the Roman Missal in 1970 (after the manner of the Book of Common Prayer), and the suppression of the Old Mass, much of whose text, including the Roman Canon, dates before the schism, is really at the heart it, along with a partial rejection of Vatican II. What marks Catholic traditionalists different from their Orthodox counterparts is that that Catholic theology requires them to be in communion with the Bishop of Rome (from which sprang the rupture with tradition). The non-application (in practice) of Summorum Pontificum within the borders of Buenos Aires was justly a cause of alarm for those who saw the Church heading in the right direction under Pope Benedict.

In the Latin West, there isn't much of a link between the law and prayer and the law of belief. Roman Catholic "orthodoxy" - as people perceive of it in the media or in the pew, is based on doctrine, not the law of prayer. A great number of Roman Catholic parishes have a Mass that has more in common with broad church (and low church) Anglicans than the pre-Conciliar norm. A "first among equals" ecclesiology, combined with Protestantized praxis, makes the Roman church more Anglican, not more Orthodox. But the Catholics still have the Pope and the Virgin Mary. I think the "pope emeritus" understood the link between prayer and belief, describing the devastation of the seminaries and the loss of faith from what he called the "false" Council of the media. The new pope, not so much. He may however prove to be a better instrument in cleaning out the rot within the Curia.


Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 14, 2013, 10:44:08 PM
Mass under Pope Francis:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3RJK0yULkCY#!

I guess I won't be tempted into going back anytime soon...

Ah, I see you've been hanging out around the SSPX circles.

You are long on name calling and insults and short on knowledge. "SSPXers" simply want the Church to be what it once was before the Modernists deployed their program of destruction 50 years ago. I wonder how many Orthodox would simply sit back and shut-up as their Church was destroyed by enemies. Traditional Roman Catholics are justifiably furious with what has happened to the Church and now we have a pope who celebrates masses that look like they have more in common with a circus.

Really easy to mouth off from where you are sitting, isn't it?

No, SSPXers just want their toy that was taken away from them.  There is nothing in their actions that shows me genuine Christian spirituality.  They're filled with hubris and deceit.  They don't want the traditions back because of any underlying spiritual reason, they want it because they want to boast to those who don't kneel to receive Communion or those who don't pray in Latin that they are better than them.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 14, 2013, 10:44:50 PM
OIC. (Well, hopefully I see now. At first I thought you were asking why people remain Roman-Rite Catholic, then I thought you were talking about sedevacantist.)

I'm not sure how many SSPX fans consider the pope to be a heretic, but I don't know why those people stay in full communion with him.

SSPX, sedevacantist.  Po-tey-tow, po-tah-tow.

Look, even if they don't outwardly proclaim the Pope to be a heretic, the fact that they view the Pauline Mass as invalid, and the Pope celebrates in the Ordinary Form... 1 + 1 always equals 2. You can't say, "the Pope is not heretic but he celebrates an invalid and heretical Mass."
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: TheMathematician on March 14, 2013, 10:45:28 PM
Mass under Pope Francis:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3RJK0yULkCY#!

I guess I won't be tempted into going back anytime soon...

Ah, I see you've been hanging out around the SSPX circles.

You are long on name calling and insults and short on knowledge. "SSPXers" simply want the Church to be what it once was before the Modernists deployed their program of destruction 50 years ago. I wonder how many Orthodox would simply sit back and shut-up as their Church was destroyed by enemies. Traditional Roman Catholics are justifiably furious with what has happened to the Church and now we have a pope who celebrates masses that look like they have more in common with a circus.

Really easy to mouth off from where you are sitting, isn't it?

No, SSPXers just want their toy that was taken away from them.  There is nothing in their actions that shows me genuine Christian spirituality.  They're filled with hubris and deceit.  They don't want the traditions back because of any underlying spiritual reason, they want it because they want to boast to those who don't kneel to receive Communion or those who don't pray in Latin that they are better than them.

Honest question, why do you have such a hatred, or so it seems, for the SSPX?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 14, 2013, 10:48:24 PM
Honest question, why do you have such a hatred, or so it seems, for the SSPX?

Just calling them out for the frauds that they are.  Even though I am no longer Catholic, I'm still saddened that the Church is being deceived and destroyed by within from them.  They will say its the modernist liberals who are destroying the Catholic Church, and that is true as well. This is not an either-or, they're just two sides of the same coin.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: William on March 14, 2013, 10:52:55 PM
Mass under Pope Francis:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3RJK0yULkCY#!

I guess I won't be tempted into going back anytime soon...

Ah, I see you've been hanging out around the SSPX circles.

You are long on name calling and insults and short on knowledge. "SSPXers" simply want the Church to be what it once was before the Modernists deployed their program of destruction 50 years ago. I wonder how many Orthodox would simply sit back and shut-up as their Church was destroyed by enemies. Traditional Roman Catholics are justifiably furious with what has happened to the Church and now we have a pope who celebrates masses that look like they have more in common with a circus.

Really easy to mouth off from where you are sitting, isn't it?

No, SSPXers just want their toy that was taken away from them.  There is nothing in their actions that shows me genuine Christian spirituality.  They're filled with hubris and deceit.  They don't want the traditions back because of any underlying spiritual reason, they want it because they want to boast to those who don't kneel to receive Communion or those who don't pray in Latin that they are better than them.

So it's wrong to be against masses like the one I linked to? Why don't we see DLs like that?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 14, 2013, 11:07:55 PM
So it's wrong to be against masses like the one I linked to? Why don't we see DLs like that?

Have you been to every Divine Liturgy celebrated around the world in the past Sunday?

And sure, you can have your disagreements with anything, but it is the spirit by how everything is done.  As Scripture says, by their fruits you will know them.  SSPXers want tradition but have no love.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: William on March 14, 2013, 11:12:26 PM
So it's wrong to be against masses like the one I linked to? Why don't we see DLs like that?

Have you been to every Divine Liturgy celebrated around the world in the past Sunday?

Orthodox liturgies are known for being traditional and non-innovative when it comes to stuff like incorporating pop songs, dancing, instruments, etc. If you have evidence to the contrary, please provide it.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: LBK on March 14, 2013, 11:15:18 PM
So it's wrong to be against masses like the one I linked to? Why don't we see DLs like that?

Have you been to every Divine Liturgy celebrated around the world in the past Sunday?

And sure, you can have your disagreements with anything, but it is the spirit by how everything is done.  As Scripture says, by their fruits you will know them.  SSPXers want tradition but have no love.

choy, I think William was trying to say that Orthodoxy has preserved a proper and unwavering sense of sacred decorum and dignity in its liturgical praxis, and has not resorted to the sort of dumbing-down so often seen in modern non-Orthodox praxis.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: John Larocque on March 14, 2013, 11:16:26 PM
A lot of traditionalists are unhappy - for them there is nowhere else to go. Breaking communion with the pope of Rome is anathema - which is why even contemplating sedevacantism, such as Fr. Anthony Cekada, is looked upon as a horror and a scandal. Some of them have embraced parallel magisteriums - groups in quasi-communion with the Vatican (SSPX) or chasing after Marian revelations. If you stay, you're unhappy (but keeping true to your baptismal and confirmation promises). If you leave, you might be unhappy - eternally as well, because salvation is dependent upon communion with the Roman pontiff. So people put up with the temporal misery, and - in the name of the traditions they were taught - give conditional obedience to their church. And some of them are better people than others, and some worse.

( The Remnant newspaper once promoted a book "We Resist You to the Face" - where traditionalists were taking on the role of St. Paul against St. Peter from Acts, correcting him in his errors).
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: William on March 14, 2013, 11:19:48 PM
A lot of traditionalists are unhappy - for them there is nowhere else to go. Breaking communion with the pope of Rome is anathema - which is why even contemplating sedevacantism, such as Fr. Anthony Cekada, is looked upon as a horror and a scandal. Some of them have embraced parallel magisteriums - groups in quasi-communion with the Vatican (SSPX) or chasing after Marian revelations. If you stay, you're unhappy (but keeping true to your baptismal and confirmation promises). If you leave, you might be unhappy - eternally as well, because salvation is dependent upon communion with the Roman pontiff. So people put up with the temporal misery, and - in the name of the traditions they were taught - give conditional obedience to their church. And some of them are better people than others.

( The Remnant newspaper once promoted a book "We Resist You to the Face" - where traditionalists were taking on the role of St. Paul against St. Peter from Acts, correcting him in his errors).

I left and now I can look at masses like the one I linked and laugh. If I was still RC I'd probably get legitimately angry after seeing that video.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Shiny on March 14, 2013, 11:53:30 PM
I left and now I can look at masses like the one I linked and laugh. If I was still RC I'd probably get legitimately angry after seeing that video.
Agreed. It shows quite a lack of reverence.

I like Pope Francis though and wish him many years.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 15, 2013, 12:01:50 AM
So it's wrong to be against masses like the one I linked to? Why don't we see DLs like that?

Have you been to every Divine Liturgy celebrated around the world in the past Sunday?

And sure, you can have your disagreements with anything, but it is the spirit by how everything is done.  As Scripture says, by their fruits you will know them.  SSPXers want tradition but have no love.

choy, I think William was trying to say that Orthodoxy has preserved a proper and unwavering sense of sacred decorum and dignity in its liturgical praxis, and has not resorted to the sort of dumbing-down so often seen in modern non-Orthodox praxis.

True, that was what drew me into Orthodoxy.

I got tired of the clown masses, biki masses, and those where my choir sang, "Her name is Jesus."
Although I would sing "His name is Jesus," I could not take the discord with half the church singing "HIS" and the other half, "HER." I finally sent a note to the Bishop, and that was the first time that the pastor took notice.

To me that smelled like heresy. Of course, I was from the diocese of fruit cakes, flakes, and nuts under Cardinal Mahony.
Title: Re: The other side of the coin maybe?
Post by: William on March 15, 2013, 12:04:24 AM
New Pope Tied to Argentina's Dirty War | Global Research

http://www.globalresearch.ca/new-pope-tied-to-argentinas-dirty-war/5326816

That picture of him communing Videla...I mean...how can you just do that and stay a bishop in good standing?

Apparently that picture was taken when Videla was in prison, not when he was in power. My bad.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Shiny on March 15, 2013, 12:04:34 AM
So it's wrong to be against masses like the one I linked to? Why don't we see DLs like that?

Have you been to every Divine Liturgy celebrated around the world in the past Sunday?

And sure, you can have your disagreements with anything, but it is the spirit by how everything is done.  As Scripture says, by their fruits you will know them.  SSPXers want tradition but have no love.

choy, I think William was trying to say that Orthodoxy has preserved a proper and unwavering sense of sacred decorum and dignity in its liturgical praxis, and has not resorted to the sort of dumbing-down so often seen in modern non-Orthodox praxis.

True, that was what drew me into Orthodoxy.

I got tired of the clown masses, biki masses, and those where my choir sang, "Her name is Jesus."
Although I would sing "His name is Jesus," I could not take the discord with half the church singing "HIS" and the other half, "HER." I finally sent a note to the Bishop, and that was the first time that the pastor took notice.

To me that smelled like heresy. Of course, I was from the diocese of fruit cakes, flakes, and nuts under Cardinal Mahony.
Biki masses? What's that short for, bikini?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 15, 2013, 12:06:54 AM
Yes, sorry.

Bikini masses.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: bkovacs on March 15, 2013, 12:07:40 AM
Mass under Pope Francis:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3RJK0yULkCY#!

I guess I won't be tempted into going back anytime soon...

Ah, I see you've been hanging out around the SSPX circles.



You are long on name calling and insults and short on knowledge. "SSPXers" simply want the Church to be what it once was before the Modernists deployed their program of destruction 50 years ago. I wonder how many Orthodox would simply sit back and shut-up as their Church was destroyed by enemies. Traditional Roman Catholics are justifiably furious with what has happened to the Church and now we have a pope who celebrates masses that look like they have more in common with a circus.

Really easy to mouth off from where you are sitting, isn't it?

I agree. I'm sure Byzantine Christians remember very well the Iconoclast controversy!!. SSPX and other "trads" want their beautiful liturgy and ethos back or maintained. Lets reverse the shoe. Take the iconostasis away, get rid of incense, Byzantine and Russian chant, and make those vestments plain looking. I bet many Byzantine Christians would have a fit. Centuries old traditions replaced by modern ones, with Bishops or Metropolitans  who place the external trappings last on the priority list. Get what I'm saying here. The pre-vatican 2 times are to the SSPX, SSPV, other trads, as important as Hagia Sophia is to Byzantine Christians. Have some compassion!.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 15, 2013, 12:13:30 AM
Mass under Pope Francis:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3RJK0yULkCY#!

I guess I won't be tempted into going back anytime soon...

Ah, I see you've been hanging out around the SSPX circles.



You are long on name calling and insults and short on knowledge. "SSPXers" simply want the Church to be what it once was before the Modernists deployed their program of destruction 50 years ago. I wonder how many Orthodox would simply sit back and shut-up as their Church was destroyed by enemies. Traditional Roman Catholics are justifiably furious with what has happened to the Church and now we have a pope who celebrates masses that look like they have more in common with a circus.

Really easy to mouth off from where you are sitting, isn't it?

I agree. I'm sure Byzantine Christians remember very well the Iconoclast controversy!!. SSPX and other "trads" want their beautiful liturgy and ethos back or maintained. Lets reverse the shoe. Take the iconostasis away, get rid of incense, Byzantine and Russian chant, and make those vestments plain looking. I bet many Byzantine Christians would have a fit. Centuries old traditions replaced by modern ones, with Bishops or Metropolitans  who place the external trappings last on the priority list. Get what I'm saying here. The pre-vatican 2 times are to the SSPX, SSPV, other trads, as important as Hagia Sophia is to Byzantine Christians. Have some compassion!.

Good post. Yes, many Roman Catholics who join the Eastern Catholic Churches have a refugee mentality, and the Latin Catholic Hierarchs know this and make it very difficult for those Catholics to cross over to the East. So, many "Catholic" refugees try to join the Orthodox Church, but some priests in the OCA are aware of this, and make those Catholics wait three years before they are received. Now, consider this, if you were a devout Catholic and were told that you could not receive Holy Communion for three years, that would be devastating.

Back on topic.

From the Papal mass today, it seems like the Pope will be good for the Catholic Church.
At least he had the charity to establish immediately a Traditional Latin Mass for his diocese.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: William on March 15, 2013, 12:16:42 AM
At least he had the charity to establish immediately a Traditional Latin Mass for his diocese.

What?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 15, 2013, 12:19:53 AM
At least he had the charity to establish immediately a Traditional Latin Mass for his diocese.

What?

Now I will have to try to locate that source.
I checked CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, FOX, etc.
Several news sources talked about Pope Francis' background in Argentina.
When Pope Benedict asked the Bishops to start having the extraordinary form of the Liturgy (The Traditional Latin Mass), then Cardinal Bergoglio was one of the first bishops to comply without hesitation.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: John Larocque on March 15, 2013, 12:21:08 AM
Re: TLM in Buenos Aires.

http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2013/03/how-summorum-pontificum-was-blocked-and.html
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: William on March 15, 2013, 12:22:31 AM
At least he had the charity to establish immediately a Traditional Latin Mass for his diocese.

What?

Now I will have to try to locate that source.
I checked CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, FOX, etc.
Several news sources talked about Pope Francis' background in Argentina.
When Pope Benedict asked the Bishops to start having the extraordinary form of the Liturgy (The Traditional Latin Mass), then Cardinal Bergoglio was one of the first bishops to comply without hesitation.


I've heard the exact opposite.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 15, 2013, 12:24:12 AM
At least he had the charity to establish immediately a Traditional Latin Mass for his diocese.

What?

Now I will have to try to locate that source.
I checked CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, FOX, etc.
Several news sources talked about Pope Francis' background in Argentina.
When Pope Benedict asked the Bishops to start having the extraordinary form of the Liturgy (The Traditional Latin Mass), then Cardinal Bergoglio was one of the first bishops to comply without hesitation.


I've heard the exact opposite.

The news source said that he established ONE TLM in ONE PARISH for the entire diocese. Now, that is a very charitable act even though those wanting to attend would have to travel two to three hours one way.
 ::)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 15, 2013, 12:31:22 AM
Re: TLM in Buenos Aires.

http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2013/03/how-summorum-pontificum-was-blocked-and.html


Thanks for that source.
That was not the news story that I read.
However, I remember when I was going to Mass in Los Angeles and Cardinal Mahony only allowed one TLM for the entire diocese. With high gas prices and congested freeways, it was very hard to attend regularly especially when the location of the mass rotated between two to four parishes. Sometimes they would have one, and sometimes not.

We finally attended the Melkite Church and within three years, left and became Orthodox Catechumens.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 15, 2013, 12:32:59 AM
At least he had the charity to establish immediately a Traditional Latin Mass for his diocese.

What?

Now I will have to try to locate that source.
I checked CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, FOX, etc.
Several news sources talked about Pope Francis' background in Argentina.
When Pope Benedict asked the Bishops to start having the extraordinary form of the Liturgy (The Traditional Latin Mass), then Cardinal Bergoglio was one of the first bishops to comply without hesitation.


I've heard the exact opposite.

The news source said that he established ONE TLM in ONE PARISH for the entire diocese. Now, that is a very charitable act even though those wanting to attend would have to travel two to three hours one way.
 ::)

This is faulty logic.  Fact is, there aren't people in a diocese to support the number of TLMs the traddies are asking for.  For example, the Archbishop of Vancouver is a supporter of the TLM, and yet in such a big area he still only has one parish run by the FSSP, and another parish on the other end of the diocese where the parish priest does one TLM every Sunday (on top of 2 OF Masses).  Fact is, the greater majority of Roman Catholics are happy with the OF.  The Bishop isn't going to establish a TLM two blocks from a Traddie even though they are the only one within an hour's drive away from that parish who is interested in going.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: William on March 15, 2013, 12:34:15 AM
At least he had the charity to establish immediately a Traditional Latin Mass for his diocese.

What?

Now I will have to try to locate that source.
I checked CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, FOX, etc.
Several news sources talked about Pope Francis' background in Argentina.
When Pope Benedict asked the Bishops to start having the extraordinary form of the Liturgy (The Traditional Latin Mass), then Cardinal Bergoglio was one of the first bishops to comply without hesitation.


I've heard the exact opposite.

The news source said that he established ONE TLM in ONE PARISH for the entire diocese. Now, that is a very charitable act even though those wanting to attend would have to travel two to three hours one way.
 ::)

This is faulty logic.  Fact is, there aren't people in a diocese to support the number of TLMs the traddies are asking for.  For example, the Archbishop of Vancouver is a supporter of the TLM, and yet in such a big area he still only has one parish run by the FSSP, and another parish on the other end of the diocese where the parish priest does one TLM every Sunday (on top of 2 OF Masses).  Fact is, the greater majority of Roman Catholics are happy with the OF.  The Bishop isn't going to establish a TLM two blocks from a Traddie even though they are the only one within an hour's drive away from that parish who is interested in going.

According to your good buddies at Rorate, though, Buenos Aires has plenty of trads.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 15, 2013, 12:34:54 AM
I agree. I'm sure Byzantine Christians remember very well the Iconoclast controversy!!. SSPX and other "trads" want their beautiful liturgy and ethos back or maintained. Lets reverse the shoe. Take the iconostasis away, get rid of incense, Byzantine and Russian chant, and make those vestments plain looking. I bet many Byzantine Christians would have a fit. Centuries old traditions replaced by modern ones, with Bishops or Metropolitans  who place the external trappings last on the priority list. Get what I'm saying here. The pre-vatican 2 times are to the SSPX, SSPV, other trads, as important as Hagia Sophia is to Byzantine Christians. Have some compassion!.

Already happened and some actually want to keep it that way.  Besides, again it is not just about wanting to restore the tradition.  It is the spirit and the method they are trying to achieve that.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 15, 2013, 12:35:51 AM
According to your good buddies at Rorate, though, Buenos Aires has plenty of trads.

They can claim all they want.  Like I said earlier, they are deceitful.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: William on March 15, 2013, 12:36:52 AM
According to your good buddies at Rorate, though, Buenos Aires has plenty of trads.

They can claim all they want.  Like I said earlier, they are deceitful.

Some of them are Argentine.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: John Larocque on March 15, 2013, 12:40:48 AM
I think traditionalists overstate how many people are like them in the Roman church. But a trickle of TLM attendes is better than nothing, and you will eventually reach a low threshold. You also have to remember, the old Rite was effectively abolished for an entire generation. Until the advent of indult masses in 1984, it was nearly impossible to attend the old Rite Mass in full communion with the Pope. The damage was done, much as England could never really go back to Sarum when Queen Mary succeeded Elizabeth. Protestantizing bishops - from Cranmer on down - brought in the new order and the old one was out.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 15, 2013, 12:43:52 AM
At least he had the charity to establish immediately a Traditional Latin Mass for his diocese.

What?

Now I will have to try to locate that source.
I checked CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, FOX, etc.
Several news sources talked about Pope Francis' background in Argentina.
When Pope Benedict asked the Bishops to start having the extraordinary form of the Liturgy (The Traditional Latin Mass), then Cardinal Bergoglio was one of the first bishops to comply without hesitation.


I've heard the exact opposite.

The news source said that he established ONE TLM in ONE PARISH for the entire diocese. Now, that is a very charitable act even though those wanting to attend would have to travel two to three hours one way.
 ::)

This is faulty logic.  Fact is, there aren't people in a diocese to support the number of TLMs the traddies are asking for.  For example, the Archbishop of Vancouver is a supporter of the TLM, and yet in such a big area he still only has one parish run by the FSSP, and another parish on the other end of the diocese where the parish priest does one TLM every Sunday (on top of 2 OF Masses).  Fact is, the greater majority of Roman Catholics are happy with the OF.  The Bishop isn't going to establish a TLM two blocks from a Traddie even though they are the only one within an hour's drive away from that parish who is interested in going.

No, it is not faulty logic. It is the worst deceit.

If a bishop is truly a man of God and a faithful shepherd, then he will provide for his sheep.
Having only one mass for the entire diocese, and then only celebrating it ONCE PER MONTH, is not building a community. The community will go elsewhere ... to the Orthodox if necessary.

And that is what my family did. We left, and wrote a note to Cardinal Mahony saying, "Goodbye." And he never sent us a reply.

Back on Topic:

I think I am liking this Pope less each day.
Praise the Lord for the Orthodox Christian Church.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: #1Sinner on March 15, 2013, 06:39:30 AM
Mass under Pope Francis:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3RJK0yULkCY#!

I guess I won't be tempted into going back anytime soon...

Ah, I see you've been hanging out around the SSPX circles.

You are long on name calling and insults and short on knowledge. "SSPXers" simply want the Church to be what it once was before the Modernists deployed their program of destruction 50 years ago. I wonder how many Orthodox would simply sit back and shut-up as their Church was destroyed by enemies. Traditional Roman Catholics are justifiably furious with what has happened to the Church and now we have a pope who celebrates masses that look like they have more in common with a circus.

Really easy to mouth off from where you are sitting, isn't it?

No, SSPXers just want their toy that was taken away from them.  There is nothing in their actions that shows me genuine Christian spirituality.  They're filled with hubris and deceit.  They don't want the traditions back because of any underlying spiritual reason, they want it because they want to boast to those who don't kneel to receive Communion or those who don't pray in Latin that they are better than them.

The "toy" you speak of is the Tradition of the Roman Church.

The rest of your post is simply strawmen and rubbish not worth a response.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: #1Sinner on March 15, 2013, 06:49:45 AM
A lot of traditionalists are unhappy - for them there is nowhere else to go. Breaking communion with the pope of Rome is anathema - which is why even contemplating sedevacantism, such as Fr. Anthony Cekada, is looked upon as a horror and a scandal. Some of them have embraced parallel magisteriums - groups in quasi-communion with the Vatican (SSPX) or chasing after Marian revelations. If you stay, you're unhappy (but keeping true to your baptismal and confirmation promises). If you leave, you might be unhappy - eternally as well, because salvation is dependent upon communion with the Roman pontiff. So people put up with the temporal misery, and - in the name of the traditions they were taught - give conditional obedience to their church. And some of them are better people than others, and some worse.

( The Remnant newspaper once promoted a book "We Resist You to the Face" - where traditionalists were taking on the role of St. Paul against St. Peter from Acts, correcting him in his errors).

This is a fantastic post and sums up my thoughts as well. These are the reasons that, with a heavy heart, I am seeking to convert to Orthodoxy. I have no axe to grind, it is simply a logical conclusion based on the evidence of what has happened.

1) I no longer accept that what is called the "Roman Catholic Church" today is the same Church prior to VII.

2) Recognize and Resist (SSPX position) simply isn't doable based on Pastor Aeternus which places the pope as the ultimate authority not only in Faith and Morals but also worship, discipline and the Rites of the Church. If the pope is the pope, you must obey.

3) Sedevacantism makes logical sense based on premises 1 and 2 but results in something too unbelievable to be true......that there are only a handful of real Catholic bishops and priests left in the World and that the pope on down are nothing but heretics with no authority.

4) Put your hope in visions, Fatima, 3rd secrets etc. Since when has the Faith been about these things? No thanks.

This leaves Orthodoxy.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: podkarpatska on March 15, 2013, 07:03:48 AM
Mass under Pope Francis:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3RJK0yULkCY#!

I guess I won't be tempted into going back anytime soon...

Ah, I see you've been hanging out around the SSPX circles.



You are long on name calling and insults and short on knowledge. "SSPXers" simply want the Church to be what it once was before the Modernists deployed their program of destruction 50 years ago. I wonder how many Orthodox would simply sit back and shut-up as their Church was destroyed by enemies. Traditional Roman Catholics are justifiably furious with what has happened to the Church and now we have a pope who celebrates masses that look like they have more in common with a circus.

Really easy to mouth off from where you are sitting, isn't it?

I agree. I'm sure Byzantine Christians remember very well the Iconoclast controversy!!. SSPX and other "trads" want their beautiful liturgy and ethos back or maintained. Lets reverse the shoe. Take the iconostasis away, get rid of incense, Byzantine and Russian chant, and make those vestments plain looking. I bet many Byzantine Christians would have a fit. Centuries old traditions replaced by modern ones, with Bishops or Metropolitans  who place the external trappings last on the priority list. Get what I'm saying here. The pre-vatican 2 times are to the SSPX, SSPV, other trads, as important as Hagia Sophia is to Byzantine Christians. Have some compassion!.

Rome tried that and ultimately retreated post Vatican 2. It one of the reasons why my family and thousands of others turned to Orthodoxy several generations ago in the United States.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Benjamin the Red on March 15, 2013, 07:21:27 AM
At least he had the charity to establish immediately a Traditional Latin Mass for his diocese.

What?

Now I will have to try to locate that source.
I checked CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, FOX, etc.
Several news sources talked about Pope Francis' background in Argentina.
When Pope Benedict asked the Bishops to start having the extraordinary form of the Liturgy (The Traditional Latin Mass), then Cardinal Bergoglio was one of the first bishops to comply without hesitation.


I've heard the exact opposite.

The news source said that he established ONE TLM in ONE PARISH for the entire diocese. Now, that is a very charitable act even though those wanting to attend would have to travel two to three hours one way.
 ::)

This is faulty logic.  Fact is, there aren't people in a diocese to support the number of TLMs the traddies are asking for.  For example, the Archbishop of Vancouver is a supporter of the TLM, and yet in such a big area he still only has one parish run by the FSSP, and another parish on the other end of the diocese where the parish priest does one TLM every Sunday (on top of 2 OF Masses).  Fact is, the greater majority of Roman Catholics are happy with the OF.  The Bishop isn't going to establish a TLM two blocks from a Traddie even though they are the only one within an hour's drive away from that parish who is interested in going.

That's probably true.

Honestly, I think, if I were Roman Catholic, I wouldn't care so much about establishing EF Masses everywhere. I'd rather want to rein in the horrid abuses of the OF. Take the Mass that His Holiness served in the Sistine Chapel yesterday, I thought it was fine. The only thing that bothered me is that it was served Versus Populum, I also wished that more chant had been used, especially during the Eucharistic canon (i.e., by the celebrant). And, I know this is a small thing, but if we're going to have laity read the Old Testament and Epistle readings, could we at least vest them as servers?

And that's it. Honestly, the first two I mention aren't that big of a deal, as I have that bone to pick with plenty of canonical Orthodox parishes, too. I'd be so much happier with the RCC if they would just serve like that all the time and flip that altar back around!
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: mike on March 15, 2013, 08:30:35 AM
With high gas prices and congested freeways, it was very hard to attend regularly especially when the location of the mass rotated between two to four parishes. Sometimes they would have one, and sometimes not.

<chuckle>

And, I know this is a small thing, but if we're going to have laity read the Old Testament and Epistle readings, could we at least vest them as servers?

What's wrong with that?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 15, 2013, 08:39:04 AM
I thought this was an interesting title:
Quote
Pray for the Pope through the Dead

The following prayer, penned by a very holy and learned priest of the Rorate Caeli Purgatorial Society, calls on all certain members of the Church Suffering – as well as the Church Triumphant -- to pray and intercede for him that he may lead the true restoration of the Traditional Latin Mass and liturgy.
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2013/03/pray-for-pope-through-dead.html
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Peter J on March 15, 2013, 08:54:18 AM
I hope he railroads the granting of Patriarchal status to the UGCC.

At the beginning of next month, Pope Francis is going to proclaim a Ukrainian Patriarchate and an SSPX Patriarchate.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Alpo on March 15, 2013, 09:03:06 AM
I thought this was an interesting title:
Quote
Pray for the Pope through the Dead

The following prayer, penned by a very holy and learned priest of the Rorate Caeli Purgatorial Society, calls on all certain members of the Church Suffering – as well as the Church Triumphant -- to pray and intercede for him that he may lead the true restoration of the Traditional Latin Mass and liturgy.
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2013/03/pray-for-pope-through-dead.html

That might be the most confusing prayer I've ever read or heard.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 15, 2013, 09:19:40 AM
A lot of traditionalists are unhappy - for them there is nowhere else to go. Breaking communion with the pope of Rome is anathema - which is why even contemplating sedevacantism, such as Fr. Anthony Cekada, is looked upon as a horror and a scandal. Some of them have embraced parallel magisteriums - groups in quasi-communion with the Vatican (SSPX) or chasing after Marian revelations. If you stay, you're unhappy (but keeping true to your baptismal and confirmation promises). If you leave, you might be unhappy - eternally as well, because salvation is dependent upon communion with the Roman pontiff. So people put up with the temporal misery, and - in the name of the traditions they were taught - give conditional obedience to their church. And some of them are better people than others, and some worse.

( The Remnant newspaper once promoted a book "We Resist You to the Face" - where traditionalists were taking on the role of St. Paul against St. Peter from Acts, correcting him in his errors).

This is a fantastic post and sums up my thoughts as well. These are the reasons that, with a heavy heart, I am seeking to convert to Orthodoxy. I have no axe to grind, it is simply a logical conclusion based on the evidence of what has happened.

1) I no longer accept that what is called the "Roman Catholic Church" today is the same Church prior to VII.

2) Recognize and Resist (SSPX position) simply isn't doable based on Pastor Aeternus which places the pope as the ultimate authority not only in Faith and Morals but also worship, discipline and the Rites of the Church. If the pope is the pope, you must obey.

3) Sedevacantism makes logical sense based on premises 1 and 2 but results in something too unbelievable to be true......that there are only a handful of real Catholic bishops and priests left in the World and that the pope on down are nothing but heretics with no authority.
And no means of recovering what they believe the necessary authority required by Pastor Aeternus, ever since the extinction of the college of cardinals elevated before 1958.
4) Put your hope in visions, Fatima, 3rd secrets etc. Since when has the Faith been about these things? No thanks.
Right answer.
This leaves Orthodoxy.
Even righter answer.

Btw, have you come across Western Rite Orthodoxy?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 15, 2013, 09:19:40 AM
I hope he railroads the granting of Patriarchal status to the UGCC.

At the beginning of next month, Pope Francis is going to proclaim a Ukrainian Patriarchate and an SSPX Patriarchate.
Did you have a revelation, or did Fatima tell you so?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 15, 2013, 09:19:40 AM
I thought this was an interesting title:
Quote
Pray for the Pope through the Dead

The following prayer, penned by a very holy and learned priest of the Rorate Caeli Purgatorial Society, calls on all certain members of the Church Suffering – as well as the Church Triumphant -- to pray and intercede for him that he may lead the true restoration of the Traditional Latin Mass and liturgy.
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2013/03/pray-for-pope-through-dead.html

That might be the most confusing prayer I've ever read or heard.
Well, consider the source.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: mike on March 15, 2013, 09:20:16 AM
I hope he railroads the granting of Patriarchal status to the UGCC.

At the beginning of next month, Pope Francis is going to proclaim a Ukrainian Patriarchate and an SSPX Patriarchate.
Did you have a revelation, or did Fatima tell you so?

It propably was a joke.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: podkarpatska on March 15, 2013, 10:00:05 AM
I hope he railroads the granting of Patriarchal status to the UGCC.

At the beginning of next month, Pope Francis is going to proclaim a Ukrainian Patriarchate and an SSPX Patriarchate.

Is this an early April fools' day to provoke alarm among some?  ;)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Peter J on March 15, 2013, 10:30:36 AM
I hope he railroads the granting of Patriarchal status to the UGCC.

At the beginning of next month, Pope Francis is going to proclaim a Ukrainian Patriarchate and an SSPX Patriarchate.

Is this an early April fools' day to provoke alarm among some?  ;)

:D

Well yes, if they're gullible enough.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 15, 2013, 12:18:52 PM
I hope he railroads the granting of Patriarchal status to the UGCC.

At the beginning of next month, Pope Francis is going to proclaim a Ukrainian Patriarchate and an SSPX Patriarchate.

I'd love to see an SSPX Patriarchate






so I can anathemize it  ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 15, 2013, 12:28:38 PM
No, it is not faulty logic. It is the worst deceit.

Deceit of what?  As I earlier commented, TLM in fact is dividing the community.  Have one Liturgy for all.  Those who go to an FSSP parish even, most of them won't dare walk into an OF Mass.  I got involved in a pro-live movement before and we had a meeting at the basement of a parish which was preceeded by an OF Mass.  One of the senior members of the group was a trad, and the trads had their Mass in the FSSP parish and then went to the meeting.  I mean, what is up with that?  Where is the unity?  People from all over the diocese came to the Mass for the event.  I was already Eastern Catholic then, I went to their Mass.  Who's being deceitful here?

If a bishop is truly a man of God and a faithful shepherd, then he will provide for his sheep.

The trads aren't his only sheep.  And the sad reality is finances for the diocese are tight in most places.  That is why there is a clause in Summorum Pontificum that there must be a stable group before the bishop puts up a TLM.  Doing a TLM for the sake of doing a TLM isn't right if it sucks on the resources of a parish than would affect the other parishioners as well.  There is already a valid Mass happening, people should learn to appreciate that.

Having only one mass for the entire diocese, and then only celebrating it ONCE PER MONTH, is not building a community. The community will go elsewhere ... to the Orthodox if necessary.

And this is bad, why?

And that is what my family did. We left, and wrote a note to Cardinal Mahony saying, "Goodbye." And he never sent us a reply.

I had a face to face with my bishop and priest on separate occassions.

Back on Topic:

I think I am liking this Pope less each day.

In 48 hours?

Praise the Lord for the Orthodox Christian Church.

Amen.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 15, 2013, 12:29:10 PM
According to your good buddies at Rorate, though, Buenos Aires has plenty of trads.

They can claim all they want.  Like I said earlier, they are deceitful.

Some of them are Argentine.

All 5 of them?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Peter J on March 15, 2013, 12:31:51 PM
I hope he railroads the granting of Patriarchal status to the UGCC.

At the beginning of next month, Pope Francis is going to proclaim a Ukrainian Patriarchate and an SSPX Patriarchate.

I'd love to see an SSPX Patriarchate



so I can anathemize it  ;D ;D ;D


Well, if it makes you feel better I have no qualms about anathemizing any of these (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conclavism#Conclavist_antipopes) traditionalist Patriarchs.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Alpo on March 15, 2013, 04:35:28 PM
I think I'm starting to like the new Pope.

I'm a sort of disappointed that they didn't re-elect Pope Benedict.
(http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/Themes/Pascha2010/images/warnwarn.gif)
I already warned you just a few days ago to use proper titles when referring to clergy, both Roman Catholic and Orthodox. That means NOT calling the retired Pope Benedict "Ratzinger". For your continued failure to use proper clergy titles even after my very recent warning, you are receiving this formal warning to last for the next two weeks. If you think this action wrong, please appeal it to me via private message.

- PeterTheAleut

Oops! Sorry about that. If any Catholics of the board found my inappropriate use of pope Benedict's civilian name somehow offensice I'd like to apologize you all. It wasn't mean that way. In my country everybody seems to be refering to His Holiness by his civilian surname so for me "Ratzinger" sounds more convenient than "pope Benedict". I have a sort of bad habit to use that instead of his proper title and ecclesiastical name.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Peter J on March 15, 2013, 04:51:09 PM
A lot of traditionalists are unhappy - for them there is nowhere else to go. Breaking communion with the pope of Rome is anathema - which is why even contemplating sedevacantism, such as Fr. Anthony Cekada, is looked upon as a horror and a scandal. Some of them have embraced parallel magisteriums - groups in quasi-communion with the Vatican (SSPX) or chasing after Marian revelations. If you stay, you're unhappy (but keeping true to your baptismal and confirmation promises). If you leave, you might be unhappy - eternally as well, because salvation is dependent upon communion with the Roman pontiff. So people put up with the temporal misery, and - in the name of the traditions they were taught - give conditional obedience to their church. And some of them are better people than others, and some worse.

( The Remnant newspaper once promoted a book "We Resist You to the Face" - where traditionalists were taking on the role of St. Paul against St. Peter from Acts, correcting him in his errors).

Another good example is Peter W. Miller's A Brief Defense of Traditionalism (http://www.seattlecatholic.com/article_20011221_A_Brief_Defense_of_Traditionalism.html). It's been a while since I read it in full, but I remember liking it. He seems to understand that ultramontantism, or at least the extreme form thereof, is problematic.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Peter J on March 15, 2013, 04:51:36 PM
Mass under Pope Francis:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3RJK0yULkCY#!

I guess I won't be tempted into going back anytime soon...

Ah, I see you've been hanging out around the SSPX circles.

You are long on name calling and insults and short on knowledge. "SSPXers" simply want the Church to be what it once was before the Modernists deployed their program of destruction 50 years ago. I wonder how many Orthodox would simply sit back and shut-up as their Church was destroyed by enemies. Traditional Roman Catholics are justifiably furious with what has happened to the Church and now we have a pope who celebrates masses that look like they have more in common with a circus.

Really easy to mouth off from where you are sitting, isn't it?

No, SSPXers just want their toy that was taken away from them.  There is nothing in their actions that shows me genuine Christian spirituality.  They're filled with hubris and deceit.  They don't want the traditions back because of any underlying spiritual reason, they want it because they want to boast to those who don't kneel to receive Communion or those who don't pray in Latin that they are better than them.

I'm no fan of the SSPX, but I think this ^^ is way off-base.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 15, 2013, 05:14:58 PM
I'm no fan of the SSPX, but I think this ^^ is way off-base.

Does the SSPX run soup kitchens for the poor?  Do they have those that help the poor like Mother Teresa's nuns?  Do they actively participate in pro-life rallies?

Essentially, can you give me examples where they feed the hungry, clothe the naked, etc.?

All I see from them is complain how the current Roman hierarchy doesn't give what they want, then they tell everyone who doesn't go to a Latin Mass that they are going to hell.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: #1Sinner on March 15, 2013, 06:03:10 PM
I'm no fan of the SSPX, but I think this ^^ is way off-base.

Does the SSPX run soup kitchens for the poor?  Do they have those that help the poor like Mother Teresa's nuns? Do they actively participate in pro-life rallies?

Essentially, can you give me examples where they feed the hungry, clothe the naked, etc.?

All I see from them is complain how the current Roman hierarchy doesn't give what they want, then they tell everyone who doesn't go to a Latin Mass that they are going to hell.

http://www.sspx.org/chapel_news/march_for_life_2013/march_for_life_2013.htm

Buddy, you have a real axe to grind. Your caricatures of SSPXers is really skewed. You have absolutely nothing to offer here but gossip, strawmen and BS.

Your lack of ability to reasonably point out problems with the SSPX and their position seems to indicate a real personal issue. I'm sorry if you have had some bad experiences with some SSPXers but your ranting borders on hysteria.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Shiny on March 15, 2013, 06:20:54 PM
So any Catholics want to give some commentary on his involvement with the Dirty War?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 15, 2013, 06:22:35 PM
I'm no fan of the SSPX, but I think this ^^ is way off-base.

Does the SSPX run soup kitchens for the poor?  Do they have those that help the poor like Mother Teresa's nuns? Do they actively participate in pro-life rallies?

Essentially, can you give me examples where they feed the hungry, clothe the naked, etc.?

All I see from them is complain how the current Roman hierarchy doesn't give what they want, then they tell everyone who doesn't go to a Latin Mass that they are going to hell.

http://www.sspx.org/chapel_news/march_for_life_2013/march_for_life_2013.htm

Buddy, you have a real axe to grind. Your caricatures of SSPXers is really skewed. You have absolutely nothing to offer here but gossip, strawmen and BS.

Your lack of ability to reasonably point out problems with the SSPX and their position seems to indicate a real personal issue. I'm sorry if you have had some bad experiences with some SSPXers but your ranting borders on hysteria.

Funny because caricatures are drawings based on what you see, and you are right in that regard.  Everything I paint is based on what I see, not something I make up.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Peter J on March 15, 2013, 06:22:50 PM
Buddy, you have a real axe to grind.

To be fair, the SSPX have a pretty big ax to grind too.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 15, 2013, 06:23:59 PM
Buddy, you have a real axe to grind.

To be fair, the SSPX have a pretty big ax to grind too.

Of course they don't.  C'mon, they're always right and everyone else is always wrong.  ;)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 15, 2013, 06:29:06 PM
I'm no fan of the SSPX, but I think this ^^ is way off-base.

Does the SSPX run soup kitchens for the poor?  Do they have those that help the poor like Mother Teresa's nuns? Do they actively participate in pro-life rallies?

Essentially, can you give me examples where they feed the hungry, clothe the naked, etc.?

All I see from them is complain how the current Roman hierarchy doesn't give what they want, then they tell everyone who doesn't go to a Latin Mass that they are going to hell.

http://www.sspx.org/chapel_news/march_for_life_2013/march_for_life_2013.htm

Buddy, you have a real axe to grind. Your caricatures of SSPXers is really skewed. You have absolutely nothing to offer here but gossip, strawmen and BS.

Your lack of ability to reasonably point out problems with the SSPX and their position seems to indicate a real personal issue. I'm sorry if you have had some bad experiences with some SSPXers but your ranting borders on hysteria.

These rants are very off topic too.

BACK ON TOPIC:

A fascinating event during the final hours of the conclave was the presence of those two seagulls who came inland during a storm and landed on that chimney vent.

Furthermore, there were storms surrounding both the resignation of Pope Benedict and the election of Pope Francis. Shortly after the resignation of Pope Benedict, there were at least two recordings of lightning flashes. During the final hours of the conclave where Pope Francis was elected, there were at least two seagulls who came inland and landed on that chimney vent during that storm.

And those pesky seagulls, who stole the show, gave away the name of the new Pope as St. Francis of Assisi loved birds.



Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Alpo on March 15, 2013, 06:29:59 PM
http://www.sspx.org/chapel_news/march_for_life_2013/march_for_life_2013.htm

(http://www.sspx.org/chapel_news/march_for_life_2013/101_3841_small.jpg)

I find it kind of humorous that women are carrying a banner of a priestly society.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 15, 2013, 06:41:10 PM
These rants are very off topic too.

BACK ON TOPIC:

A fascinating event during the final hours of the conclave was the presence of those two seagulls who came inland during a storm and landed on that chimney vent.

Furthermore, there were storms surrounding both the resignation of Pope Benedict and the election of Pope Francis. Shortly after the resignation of Pope Benedict, there were at least two recordings of lightning flashes. During the final hours of the conclave where Pope Francis was elected, there were at least two seagulls who came inland and landed on that chimney vent during that storm.

And those pesky seagulls, who stole the show, gave away the name of the new Pope as St. Francis of Assisi loved birds.

I thought he loved all animals.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 15, 2013, 06:43:08 PM
These rants are very off topic too.

BACK ON TOPIC:

A fascinating event during the final hours of the conclave was the presence of those two seagulls who came inland during a storm and landed on that chimney vent.

Furthermore, there were storms surrounding both the resignation of Pope Benedict and the election of Pope Francis. Shortly after the resignation of Pope Benedict, there were at least two recordings of lightning flashes. During the final hours of the conclave where Pope Francis was elected, there were at least two seagulls who came inland and landed on that chimney vent during that storm.

And those pesky seagulls, who stole the show, gave away the name of the new Pope as St. Francis of Assisi loved birds.

I thought he loved all animals.

True, but his statues and uncanonical icons show him surrounded by birds.
The birds even like to land on his statues.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 15, 2013, 06:45:49 PM
These rants are very off topic too.

BACK ON TOPIC:

A fascinating event during the final hours of the conclave was the presence of those two seagulls who came inland during a storm and landed on that chimney vent.

Furthermore, there were storms surrounding both the resignation of Pope Benedict and the election of Pope Francis. Shortly after the resignation of Pope Benedict, there were at least two recordings of lightning flashes. During the final hours of the conclave where Pope Francis was elected, there were at least two seagulls who came inland and landed on that chimney vent during that storm.

And those pesky seagulls, who stole the show, gave away the name of the new Pope as St. Francis of Assisi loved birds.

I thought he loved all animals.

True, but his statues and uncanonical icons show him surrounded by birds.
The birds even like to land on his statues.

Birds like to land on all statues.

But isn't the animal most associated with him is brother wolf?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Nephi on March 15, 2013, 06:46:53 PM
Birds like to land on all statues.

But isn't the animal most associated with him is brother wolf?

I've always associated him with birds and rabbits, as those are the two animals I've always seen him depicted with.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: biro on March 15, 2013, 06:47:12 PM
The seagulls thing was cute. I saw that on a news site. :)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 15, 2013, 06:55:48 PM
Birds like to land on all statues.

But isn't the animal most associated with him is brother wolf?

I've always associated him with birds and rabbits, as those are the two animals I've always seen him depicted with.

But there is quite a story about him and the wolf though.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 15, 2013, 06:59:30 PM
Birds like to land on all statues.

But isn't the animal most associated with him is brother wolf?

I've always associated him with birds and rabbits, as those are the two animals I've always seen him depicted with.

But there is quite a story about him and the wolf though.

Perhaps it would be a good idea to start a new thread about the wolf, unless you believe that there may be a connection between that wolf and Pope Francis.

What did you think about the seagulls on the papal chimney vent during the conclave?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 15, 2013, 07:06:48 PM
Perhaps it would be a good idea to start a new thread about the wolf, unless you believe that there may be a connection between that wolf and Pope Francis.

What did you think about the seagulls on the papal chimney vent during the conclave?

I live in Vancouver, we have a lot of that.  I don't know about the Vatican and how common that sight is.  My home is further east and farther away from the coast, but I still see a lot of seagulls, especially during garbage days.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: John Larocque on March 15, 2013, 07:11:02 PM
A senior Anglican prelate had this to offer.

http://www.churchofengland.org/media-centre/news/2013/03/pope-francis-1st.aspx

Quote
I was also impressed by the stress on his being 'Bishop of Rome' which emerged in just those few first spontaneous words:  'You know that the duty of the conclave was to give a bishop to Rome. It seems that my brother cardinals went almost to the end of the world to get him. But here we are.'

This is not only a pastoral stress.  It is also a fundamental theological principle.  The universal Primate, whom some Anglicans and many other Christians are beginning to recognise, is still the bishop of a local church, a bishop of the Church, not a single bishop over the Church.

But the task before Pope Francis is immense.  All Christians should pray for him.  I shall be praying for him in Rome at his installation on Tuesday...

I don't really know why the EP is showing up at the enthronement (for the first time in a millenia?), but the new pope's choosing to focus on being a local bishop caught my attention. He seems to come from a place of authentic humility as well. I think he will win a lot of people over - he has the right ways, and I think the right instincts. A protestant pastor friend of his remarked on how he always asked people to pray for him, which he did when he came out and asked people to say a Pater Noster and Ave Maria. (This same pastor thought the Cardinal was a better pastor than an administrator)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Nephi on March 15, 2013, 07:19:10 PM
Quote
Alejandro Rodriguez de Cabo (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/15/alejandro-rodriguez-madrid-predicted-pope-francis_n_2884418.html?utm_hp_ref=religion), Spanish Man, Predicted Pope Francis Before He Was Elected


A 22-year-old man in Madrid apparently predicted who would be the next pope last month -- just a few hours before the pope emeritus announced his resignation.

Alejandro Rodriguez de Cabo's girlfriend, Yolanda De Mena, sent out a tweet on Feb. 11 claiming that earlier that morning her boyfriend had awoken with a strange premonition.

"My boyfriend woke up last night at 4 a.m. saying he had dreamed of a new pope called "Francis I" and Benedict resigned today," the message read.

Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: stanley123 on March 15, 2013, 07:23:18 PM
A lot of traditionalists are unhappy - for them there is nowhere else to go. Breaking communion with the pope of Rome is anathema - which is why even contemplating sedevacantism, such as Fr. Anthony Cekada, is looked upon as a horror and a scandal. Some of them have embraced parallel magisteriums - groups in quasi-communion with the Vatican (SSPX) or chasing after Marian revelations. If you stay, you're unhappy (but keeping true to your baptismal and confirmation promises). If you leave, you might be unhappy - eternally as well, because salvation is dependent upon communion with the Roman pontiff. So people put up with the temporal misery, and - in the name of the traditions they were taught - give conditional obedience to their church. And some of them are better people than others, and some worse.

( The Remnant newspaper once promoted a book "We Resist You to the Face" - where traditionalists were taking on the role of St. Paul against St. Peter from Acts, correcting him in his errors).

This is a fantastic post and sums up my thoughts as well. These are the reasons that, with a heavy heart, I am seeking to convert to Orthodoxy. I have no axe to grind, it is simply a logical conclusion based on the evidence of what has happened.

1) I no longer accept that what is called the "Roman Catholic Church" today is the same Church prior to VII.

2) Recognize and Resist (SSPX position) simply isn't doable based on Pastor Aeternus which places the pope as the ultimate authority not only in Faith and Morals but also worship, discipline and the Rites of the Church. If the pope is the pope, you must obey.

3) Sedevacantism makes logical sense based on premises 1 and 2 but results in something too unbelievable to be true......that there are only a handful of real Catholic bishops and priests left in the World and that the pope on down are nothing but heretics with no authority.

4) Put your hope in visions, Fatima, 3rd secrets etc. Since when has the Faith been about these things? No thanks.

This leaves Orthodoxy.
Things like this have occurred to me also. But what is your opinion on venial sin and Purgatory, which are teachings of the Roman Church, but not of the Orthodox Church?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: #1Sinner on March 15, 2013, 09:01:15 PM
A lot of traditionalists are unhappy - for them there is nowhere else to go. Breaking communion with the pope of Rome is anathema - which is why even contemplating sedevacantism, such as Fr. Anthony Cekada, is looked upon as a horror and a scandal. Some of them have embraced parallel magisteriums - groups in quasi-communion with the Vatican (SSPX) or chasing after Marian revelations. If you stay, you're unhappy (but keeping true to your baptismal and confirmation promises). If you leave, you might be unhappy - eternally as well, because salvation is dependent upon communion with the Roman pontiff. So people put up with the temporal misery, and - in the name of the traditions they were taught - give conditional obedience to their church. And some of them are better people than others, and some worse.

( The Remnant newspaper once promoted a book "We Resist You to the Face" - where traditionalists were taking on the role of St. Paul against St. Peter from Acts, correcting him in his errors).

This is a fantastic post and sums up my thoughts as well. These are the reasons that, with a heavy heart, I am seeking to convert to Orthodoxy. I have no axe to grind, it is simply a logical conclusion based on the evidence of what has happened.

1) I no longer accept that what is called the "Roman Catholic Church" today is the same Church prior to VII.

2) Recognize and Resist (SSPX position) simply isn't doable based on Pastor Aeternus which places the pope as the ultimate authority not only in Faith and Morals but also worship, discipline and the Rites of the Church. If the pope is the pope, you must obey.

3) Sedevacantism makes logical sense based on premises 1 and 2 but results in something too unbelievable to be true......that there are only a handful of real Catholic bishops and priests left in the World and that the pope on down are nothing but heretics with no authority.

4) Put your hope in visions, Fatima, 3rd secrets etc. Since when has the Faith been about these things? No thanks.

This leaves Orthodoxy.
Things like this have occurred to me also. But what is your opinion on venial sin and Purgatory, which are teachings of the Roman Church, but not of the Orthodox Church?

Hello, Stanley.

First off the Catholic Church has always allowed a certain freedom in theological thought. Eastern Catholics also share the Orthodox understanding of these and other theological questions.

Secondly, since Orthodoxy is the only real answer, I must submit my will and intellect to her teachings.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Melodist on March 15, 2013, 09:09:40 PM
venial sin

This isn't a cause of division.

Quote
Purgatory

While this has been a cause of division since the 15th century, with how little has actually been dogmatically defined by both sides, I don't think this particular point is beyond reconciling.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Peter J on March 15, 2013, 09:20:04 PM
Buddy, you have a real axe to grind.

To be fair, the SSPX have a pretty big ax to grind too.

Of course they don't.  C'mon, they're always right and everyone else is always wrong.  ;)

That's what I meant to say. My fingers must have slipped or something.  :laugh:
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 15, 2013, 09:21:37 PM
Hello, Stanley.

First off the Catholic Church has always allowed a certain freedom in theological thought. Eastern Catholics also share the Orthodox understanding of these and other theological questions.

Secondly, since Orthodoxy is the only real answer, I must submit my will and intellect to her teachings.

If your problem is that you want the pre-Vatican II Church, you will not find it in Orthodoxy.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 15, 2013, 09:26:45 PM
Hello, Stanley.

First off the Catholic Church has always allowed a certain freedom in theological thought. Eastern Catholics also share the Orthodox understanding of these and other theological questions.

Secondly, since Orthodoxy is the only real answer, I must submit my will and intellect to her teachings.

If your problem is that you want the pre-Vatican II I Church, you will not find it in Orthodoxy.

Fixed it for you.

Orthodoxy is definitely pre-Vatican I and pre-Council of Trent. It was founded in 33 A.D.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: #1Sinner on March 15, 2013, 09:38:18 PM
Hello, Stanley.

First off the Catholic Church has always allowed a certain freedom in theological thought. Eastern Catholics also share the Orthodox understanding of these and other theological questions.

Secondly, since Orthodoxy is the only real answer, I must submit my will and intellect to her teachings.

If your problem is that you want the pre-Vatican II Church, you will not find it in Orthodoxy.

I seek not the pre-VII Latin Church, friend. I seek the Truth and Orthodoxy is it.

I'm not even sure how you read that into my post. I don't seek conflict.....I will soon be joining you on the road to Orthodoxy. I perhaps took a different path being an "SSPXer" which accounts for my problems with your generalizations about them. Soon we shall commune from the same chalice, brother.

peace.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 15, 2013, 09:41:05 PM
Hello, Stanley.

First off the Catholic Church has always allowed a certain freedom in theological thought. Eastern Catholics also share the Orthodox understanding of these and other theological questions.

Secondly, since Orthodoxy is the only real answer, I must submit my will and intellect to her teachings.

If your problem is that you want the pre-Vatican II I Church, you will not find it in Orthodoxy.

Fixed it for you.

Orthodoxy is definitely pre-Vatican I and pre-Council of Trent. It was founded in 33 A.D.

That was my point.  When I was Eastern Catholic it was the same problem.  Some traddies will show up trying to search for the Pre-Vatican II Church.  While our priests faced east and chanted (for the most part), we don't kneel, we don't use Latin, and we were under the same Pope.  Same with Orthodoxy.  One really has to want the ancient Church and the ancient faith, the one that has been there from the beginning, to become Orthodox, not merely a pre-Vatican II or pre-Vatican I Roman Catholic Church.  I don't know how many traddies would go pre-Trent, Trent has always been the epitome of traditionalism according to the traditionalists.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 15, 2013, 09:43:00 PM
I seek not the pre-VII Latin Church, friend. I seek the Truth and Orthodoxy is it.

I'm not even sure how you read that into my post unless you are trying to, in bad faith, attribute meaning to my post that simply isn't there.

You said that you believe the RC Church is not the same as the RC Church pre-V2.  That is why I commented that you will not find even that in Orthodoxy.  Refer to my reply to Maria.  There is no bad faith there, I took off from one of your posts.  I apologize if there is a bigger context that I have missed.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: #1Sinner on March 15, 2013, 09:45:10 PM
Hello, Stanley.

First off the Catholic Church has always allowed a certain freedom in theological thought. Eastern Catholics also share the Orthodox understanding of these and other theological questions.

Secondly, since Orthodoxy is the only real answer, I must submit my will and intellect to her teachings.

If your problem is that you want the pre-Vatican II I Church, you will not find it in Orthodoxy.

Fixed it for you.

Orthodoxy is definitely pre-Vatican I and pre-Council of Trent. It was founded in 33 A.D.

That was my point.  When I was Eastern Catholic it was the same problem.  Some traddies will show up trying to search for the Pre-Vatican II Church.  While our priests faced east and chanted (for the most part), we don't kneel, we don't use Latin, and we were under the same Pope.  Same with Orthodoxy.  One really has to want the ancient Church and the ancient faith, the one that has been there from the beginning, to become Orthodox, not merely a pre-Vatican II or pre-Vatican I Roman Catholic Church.  I don't know how many traddies would go pre-Trent, Trent has always been the epitome of traditionalism according to the traditionalists.

This has always bugged me a bit. There seems to be a tendency to assume that there was no Church before Trent or St. Thomas Aquinas. Catholic "traditionalism" only seems to go back to about the 13th century.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: #1Sinner on March 15, 2013, 09:46:06 PM
I seek not the pre-VII Latin Church, friend. I seek the Truth and Orthodoxy is it.

I'm not even sure how you read that into my post unless you are trying to, in bad faith, attribute meaning to my post that simply isn't there.

You said that you believe the RC Church is not the same as the RC Church pre-V2.  That is why I commented that you will not find even that in Orthodoxy.  Refer to my reply to Maria.  There is no bad faith there, I took off from one of your posts.  I apologize if there is a bigger context that I have missed.

You're quick......I have since modified my post.  ;)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 15, 2013, 09:49:12 PM
This has always bugged me a bit. There seems to be a tendency to assume that there was no Church before Trent or St. Thomas Aquinas. Catholic "traditionalism" only seems to go back to about the 13th century.

Same here.  I commented on another thread that there seems to be a dearth of information about the pre-Trent Church.  And I don't know if there is just lack of catechesis or just lack of emphasis, but there seems to be little common knowledge about the early Church.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 15, 2013, 09:49:20 PM
Hello, Stanley.

First off the Catholic Church has always allowed a certain freedom in theological thought. Eastern Catholics also share the Orthodox understanding of these and other theological questions.

Secondly, since Orthodoxy is the only real answer, I must submit my will and intellect to her teachings.

If your problem is that you want the pre-Vatican II I Church, you will not find it in Orthodoxy.

Fixed it for you.

Orthodoxy is definitely pre-Vatican I and pre-Council of Trent. It was founded in 33 A.D.

That was my point.  When I was Eastern Catholic it was the same problem.  Some traddies will show up trying to search for the Pre-Vatican II Church.  While our priests faced east and chanted (for the most part), we don't kneel, we don't use Latin, and we were under the same Pope.  Same with Orthodoxy.  One really has to want the ancient Church and the ancient faith, the one that has been there from the beginning, to become Orthodox, not merely a pre-Vatican II or pre-Vatican I Roman Catholic Church.  I don't know how many traddies would go pre-Trent, Trent has always been the epitome of traditionalism according to the traditionalists.

I was never part of the Traditional Catholics. Since I was terribly distracted whenever I encountered clown masses, dancing girls, or Renew masses present in Cardinal Mahony's jurisdiction, I could walk out of those. However, the readers, who were instructed to use gender-inclusive language and address the Apostles as "she" were everywhere present, since they were instructed at the Archdiocesan headquarters. Thus, I found solace with the Melkites and fell in love with Byzantine Chant.

I took to Orthodoxy like a fish to water. Not surprisingly, my aunt told me that my heritage was Maronite-Melkite.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 15, 2013, 09:55:05 PM
I was never part of the Traditional Catholics. Since I was terribly distracted whenever I encountered clown masses, dancing girls, or Renew masses present in Cardinal Mahony's jurisdiction, I could walk out of those. However, the readers, who were instructed to use gender-inclusive language and address the Apostles as "she" were everywhere present, since they were instructed at the Archdiocesan headquarters. Thus, I found solace with the Melkites and fell in love with Byzantine Chant.

I took to Orthodoxy like a fish to water. Not surprisingly, my aunt told me that my heritage was Maronite-Melkite.

I don't have a problem with the OF, but I do recognize that some priests are better than others.  My journey began when our wonderful parish priest was reassigned.  The new priest was, meh.  If that priest was never reassigned, I'm pretty sure I'd still be Roman Catholic today.  I never would have looked beyond Roman Catholicism.  After that I did explore Traditional Roman Catholicism via the FSSP, but I just didn't feel at ease there.  While the FSSP priests were wonderful priests, the attitude I so abhor was there among the laity.  So I went EC, which was really my stepping stone to Orthodoxy.

Anyway, do you think the new Pope is really going to head towards a reunion?  People have been overanalyzing his initial speech and it suggest that he would like to emphasize on himself as the Bishop of the Diocese of Rome, rather than the Pope of the entire Catholic Church.  Definitely the Orthodox welcome that.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 15, 2013, 09:56:42 PM
What is the OF?

NO is Novus Ordo.
DL is the Divine Liturgy.
TLM = Tridentine Latin Mass
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: #1Sinner on March 15, 2013, 10:02:46 PM
I was never part of the Traditional Catholics. Since I was terribly distracted whenever I encountered clown masses, dancing girls, or Renew masses present in Cardinal Mahony's jurisdiction, I could walk out of those. However, the readers, who were instructed to use gender-inclusive language and address the Apostles as "she" were everywhere present, since they were instructed at the Archdiocesan headquarters. Thus, I found solace with the Melkites and fell in love with Byzantine Chant.

I took to Orthodoxy like a fish to water. Not surprisingly, my aunt told me that my heritage was Maronite-Melkite.

I don't have a problem with the OF, but I do recognize that some priests are better than others.  My journey began when our wonderful parish priest was reassigned.  The new priest was, meh.  If that priest was never reassigned, I'm pretty sure I'd still be Roman Catholic today.  I never would have looked beyond Roman Catholicism.  After that I did explore Traditional Roman Catholicism via the FSSP, but I just didn't feel at ease there.  While the FSSP priests were wonderful priests, the attitude I so abhor was there among the laity.  So I went EC, which was really my stepping stone to Orthodoxy.

Anyway, do you think the new Pope is really going to head towards a reunion?  People have been overanalyzing his initial speech and it suggest that he would like to emphasize on himself as the Bishop of the Diocese of Rome, rather than the Pope of the entire Catholic Church.  Definitely the Orthodox welcome that.

Do keep in mind that the attitude of clergy and certain of the laity shouldn't be a barometer of truth, as I'm sure you know. I'm sure there are some cantankerous, nasty Orthodox Christians as well.....present company excluded of course.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 15, 2013, 10:03:24 PM

Anyway, do you think the new Pope is really going to head towards a reunion?  People have been overanalyzing his initial speech and it suggest that he would like to emphasize on himself as the Bishop of the Diocese of Rome, rather than the Pope of the entire Catholic Church.  Definitely the Orthodox welcome that.

Yes, I think Pope Francis will work toward reunion and a one-world religion, but it will be a false reunion because of his heavy involvement with the Charismatic Renewal, the Pentecostal Movement, and annual Chanukah services. I would not be surprised if the Antiochian Patriarch of Antioch approaches the Pope and seeks a reunion too. In fact, Patriarch John might be the first one to swim across the Mediterranean Sea.

Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 15, 2013, 10:04:29 PM
I was never part of the Traditional Catholics. Since I was terribly distracted whenever I encountered clown masses, dancing girls, or Renew masses present in Cardinal Mahony's jurisdiction, I could walk out of those. However, the readers, who were instructed to use gender-inclusive language and address the Apostles as "she" were everywhere present, since they were instructed at the Archdiocesan headquarters. Thus, I found solace with the Melkites and fell in love with Byzantine Chant.

I took to Orthodoxy like a fish to water. Not surprisingly, my aunt told me that my heritage was Maronite-Melkite.

I don't have a problem with the OF, but I do recognize that some priests are better than others.  My journey began when our wonderful parish priest was reassigned.  The new priest was, meh.  If that priest was never reassigned, I'm pretty sure I'd still be Roman Catholic today.  I never would have looked beyond Roman Catholicism.  After that I did explore Traditional Roman Catholicism via the FSSP, but I just didn't feel at ease there.  While the FSSP priests were wonderful priests, the attitude I so abhor was there among the laity.  So I went EC, which was really my stepping stone to Orthodoxy.

Anyway, do you think the new Pope is really going to head towards a reunion?  People have been overanalyzing his initial speech and it suggest that he would like to emphasize on himself as the Bishop of the Diocese of Rome, rather than the Pope of the entire Catholic Church.  Definitely the Orthodox welcome that.

Do keep in mind that the attitude of clergy and certain of the laity shouldn't be a barometer of truth, as I'm sure you know. I'm sure there are some cantankerous, nasty Orthodox Christians as well.....present company excluded of course.

Yes, I have encountered some of those cantankerous ones. No further comments.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: James2 on March 15, 2013, 10:06:17 PM
What is the OF?

NO is Novus Ordo.
DL is the Divine Liturgy.
TLM = Tridentine Latin Mass

OF (Ordinary Form) = Novus Ordo
EF (Extraordinary Form) = TLM, also called Usus Antiquior
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 15, 2013, 10:08:18 PM
What is the OF?

NO is Novus Ordo.
DL is the Divine Liturgy.
TLM = Tridentine Latin Mass

OF (Ordinary Form) = Novus Ordo
EF (Extraordinary Form) = TLM, also called Usus Antiquior

Thanks, I converted to Orthodoxy back in 1996 during the reign of Pope John Paul II.
I gather that the Vatican did not like NO applied to its Ordinary Form.  ::)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Basil 320 on March 15, 2013, 10:17:16 PM
This thread has gotten so long, I can't find it if it was specified; would someone please tell me what does "SSPX" stand for and what is it?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: #1Sinner on March 15, 2013, 10:21:48 PM
This thread has gotten so long, I can't find it if it was specified; would someone please tell me what does "SSPX" stand for and what is it?

SSPX stands for the Society of Saint Pius X. They are a traditional group of priests founded by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre in response to the modernist reforms of Vatican II. They say the Latin Mass exclusively and continue to resist the liberalizing trends in the Roman Church.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Basil 320 on March 15, 2013, 10:24:22 PM
Ok, thanks, I am familiar with this archbishop's activities.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 15, 2013, 10:35:09 PM
I was never part of the Traditional Catholics. Since I was terribly distracted whenever I encountered clown masses, dancing girls, or Renew masses present in Cardinal Mahony's jurisdiction, I could walk out of those. However, the readers, who were instructed to use gender-inclusive language and address the Apostles as "she" were everywhere present, since they were instructed at the Archdiocesan headquarters. Thus, I found solace with the Melkites and fell in love with Byzantine Chant.

I took to Orthodoxy like a fish to water. Not surprisingly, my aunt told me that my heritage was Maronite-Melkite.

I don't have a problem with the OF, but I do recognize that some priests are better than others.  My journey began when our wonderful parish priest was reassigned.  The new priest was, meh.  If that priest was never reassigned, I'm pretty sure I'd still be Roman Catholic today.  I never would have looked beyond Roman Catholicism.  After that I did explore Traditional Roman Catholicism via the FSSP, but I just didn't feel at ease there.  While the FSSP priests were wonderful priests, the attitude I so abhor was there among the laity.  So I went EC, which was really my stepping stone to Orthodoxy.


In Orthodoxy, you probably will encounter personality types that can shock you.
In fact, I have met some OCD types and bi-polar types who are far from perfect.
Some priests need more prayers and patience than other priests.
We all are sinners. None of us are perfect.

I encountered heresy in Roman Catholicism and sought Orthodoxy as a remedy.
I was not running away from certain personalities.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 15, 2013, 10:46:09 PM

Anyway, do you think the new Pope is really going to head towards a reunion?  People have been overanalyzing his initial speech and it suggest that he would like to emphasize on himself as the Bishop of the Diocese of Rome, rather than the Pope of the entire Catholic Church.  Definitely the Orthodox welcome that.

Yes, I think Pope Francis will work toward reunion and a one-world religion, but it will be a false reunion because of his heavy involvement with the Charismatic Renewal, the Pentecostal Movement, and annual Chanukah services. I would not be surprised if the Antiochian Patriarch of Antioch approaches the Pope and seeks a reunion too. In fact, Patriarch John might be the first one to swim across the Mediterranean Sea.



You think its that?  I've been very positive on this but a friend of mine brought up an interesting fact.  At this point is speculation, but this speculation is that the EP might cut a deal with Rome to help fortify its territories and then use this against Moscow.

I guess we'll just have to look at what happens and test the spirit of whatever takes place.  Unity is always good, but a union based on false pretenses is not true unity.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 15, 2013, 10:48:14 PM
I was never part of the Traditional Catholics. Since I was terribly distracted whenever I encountered clown masses, dancing girls, or Renew masses present in Cardinal Mahony's jurisdiction, I could walk out of those. However, the readers, who were instructed to use gender-inclusive language and address the Apostles as "she" were everywhere present, since they were instructed at the Archdiocesan headquarters. Thus, I found solace with the Melkites and fell in love with Byzantine Chant.

I took to Orthodoxy like a fish to water. Not surprisingly, my aunt told me that my heritage was Maronite-Melkite.

I don't have a problem with the OF, but I do recognize that some priests are better than others.  My journey began when our wonderful parish priest was reassigned.  The new priest was, meh.  If that priest was never reassigned, I'm pretty sure I'd still be Roman Catholic today.  I never would have looked beyond Roman Catholicism.  After that I did explore Traditional Roman Catholicism via the FSSP, but I just didn't feel at ease there.  While the FSSP priests were wonderful priests, the attitude I so abhor was there among the laity.  So I went EC, which was really my stepping stone to Orthodoxy.

Anyway, do you think the new Pope is really going to head towards a reunion?  People have been overanalyzing his initial speech and it suggest that he would like to emphasize on himself as the Bishop of the Diocese of Rome, rather than the Pope of the entire Catholic Church.  Definitely the Orthodox welcome that.

Do keep in mind that the attitude of clergy and certain of the laity shouldn't be a barometer of truth, as I'm sure you know. I'm sure there are some cantankerous, nasty Orthodox Christians as well.....present company excluded of course.

Of course.  But if a priest is good and holy, then chances are most of the parishioners will be too.  The bad ones would leave.  That was the case with the RC priest I told you about.  Given that he doesn't really have that friendly of a personality, but he is very sound with his beliefs.  Many people left because they can't get their way.  When he left those people came back and it became the happy-clappy, Nazi-saluting type of crowd.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 15, 2013, 10:54:36 PM

Anyway, do you think the new Pope is really going to head towards a reunion?  People have been overanalyzing his initial speech and it suggest that he would like to emphasize on himself as the Bishop of the Diocese of Rome, rather than the Pope of the entire Catholic Church.  Definitely the Orthodox welcome that.

Yes, I think Pope Francis will work toward reunion and a one-world religion, but it will be a false reunion because of his heavy involvement with the Charismatic Renewal, the Pentecostal Movement, and annual Chanukah services. I would not be surprised if the Antiochian Patriarch of Antioch approaches the Pope and seeks a reunion too. In fact, Patriarch John might be the first one to swim across the Mediterranean Sea.



You think its that?  I've been very positive on this but a friend of mine brought up an interesting fact.  At this point is speculation, but this speculation is that the EP might cut a deal with Rome to help fortify its territories and then use this against Moscow.

I guess we'll just have to look at what happens and test the spirit of whatever takes place.  Unity is always good, but a union based on false pretenses is not true unity.

Pope Benedict XVI saw this division between Moscow and the EP when he held meetings at Ravenna. The delegates from Moscow walked out. I think Pope Francis realizes that in order to have unity between the EP, MP, and the Antiochians, he needs to bring the three together. However, I think the Antiochians are closer to unity with the Pope than either Constantinople or Moscow. These next three years should be interesting.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 15, 2013, 10:57:43 PM
Pope Benedict XVI saw this division between Moscow and the EP when he held meetings at Ravenna. The delegates from Moscow walked out. I think Pope Francis realizes that in order to have unity between the EP, MP, and the Antiochians, he needs to bring the three together. However, I think the Antiochians are closer to unity with the Pope than either Constantinople or Moscow. These next three years should be interesting.

But even if the ecclesiology is fixed, there are still a long list of other theological issues that need to be resolved.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 15, 2013, 11:05:21 PM
Pope Benedict XVI saw this division between Moscow and the EP when he held meetings at Ravenna. The delegates from Moscow walked out. I think Pope Francis realizes that in order to have unity between the EP, MP, and the Antiochians, he needs to bring the three together. However, I think the Antiochians are closer to unity with the Pope than either Constantinople or Moscow. These next three years should be interesting.

But even if the ecclesiology is fixed, there are still a long list of other theological issues that need to be resolved.

Exactly. Did you read the enthronement address of Patriarch John of Antioch? I will try to find a link and post it here.

Scroll down to the Enthronement Speech: http://www.antiochian.org/sites/antiochian.org/files/march_2013_word.pdf
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Basil 320 on March 15, 2013, 11:50:34 PM

Anyway, do you think the new Pope is really going to head towards a reunion?  People have been overanalyzing his initial speech and it suggest that he would like to emphasize on himself as the Bishop of the Diocese of Rome, rather than the Pope of the entire Catholic Church.  Definitely the Orthodox welcome that.

Yes, I think Pope Francis will work toward reunion and a one-world religion, but it will be a false reunion because of his heavy involvement with the Charismatic Renewal, the Pentecostal Movement, and annual Chanukah services. I would not be surprised if the Antiochian Patriarch of Antioch approaches the Pope and seeks a reunion too. In fact, Patriarch John might be the first one to swim across the Mediterranean Sea.




Except that "With God, all things are possible," not under any circumstances can I imagine unification between the Roman Catholic Church and the  Eastern Orthodox Church, not-with-standing the "Dialogue of Love" and the ecumenical lingo, i.e. "the two lungs," etc., the Roman Catholic Church is not going to renounce its innovative teaching and doctrine, like its Papal unilateral addition of non-scripturally based language to the 9th Article of the "Symbol of Faith," that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father "and the Son" (Filioque); that a single bishop of the church is infallible when he speaks "Ex Cathedra;" that the Mother of God was conceived immaculately; etc.  Likewise, the Eastern Orthodox Church will never abandon Holy Tradition and compromise on these issues.  To paraphrase Patriarch Bartholomew, who, during his visit to America in 1997, spoke the following words at Georgetown University, "While we share a 1,000 common history, we have also lived apart during another 1,000 years."

A serious and respectful theological dialogue should focus on these substantial matters in dispute, and publish the arguments in support of the church's respective positions on them, side by side, instead of talking about "two lungs."

Trinitarian traditional churches, led by the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church, should forge an alliance to speak to the increasingly secular world, and work to refute the heretical message of the scourge of Moslem terror.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Nephi on March 15, 2013, 11:56:01 PM
Exactly. Did you read the enthronement address of Patriarch John of Antioch? I will try to find a link and post it here.

Scroll down to the Enthronement Speech: http://www.antiochian.org/sites/antiochian.org/files/march_2013_word.pdf

I don't see this flagging an immediate attempt to swim to Rome, despite all of the flowery language. Interestingly, His Beatitude, when mentioning the Great and Holy Synod, says that the Antiochian Church will accept the consensus of the Orthodox Churches. I don't see him saying this but then also intending to abandon the consensus and go join Rome.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 16, 2013, 12:04:17 AM

Anyway, do you think the new Pope is really going to head towards a reunion?  People have been overanalyzing his initial speech and it suggest that he would like to emphasize on himself as the Bishop of the Diocese of Rome, rather than the Pope of the entire Catholic Church.  Definitely the Orthodox welcome that.

Yes, I think Pope Francis will work toward reunion and a one-world religion, but it will be a false reunion because of his heavy involvement with the Charismatic Renewal, the Pentecostal Movement, and annual Chanukah services. I would not be surprised if the Antiochian Patriarch of Antioch approaches the Pope and seeks a reunion too. In fact, Patriarch John might be the first one to swim across the Mediterranean Sea.




Except that "With God, all things are possible," not under any circumstances can I imagine unification between the Roman Catholic Church and the  Eastern Orthodox Church, not-with-standing the "Dialogue of Love" and the ecumenical lingo, i.e. "the two lungs," etc., the Roman Catholic Church is not going to renounce its innovative teaching and doctrine, like its Papal unilateral addition of non-scripturally based language to the 9th Article of the "Symbol of Faith," that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father "and the Son" (Filioque); that a single bishop of the church is infallible when he speaks "Ex Cathedra;" that the Mother of God was conceived immaculately; etc.  Likewise, the Eastern Orthodox Church will never abandon Holy Tradition and compromise on these issues.  To paraphrase Patriarch Bartholomew, who, during his visit to America in 1997, spoke the following words at Georgetown University, "While we share a 1,000 common history, we have also lived apart during another 1,000 years."

A serious and respectful theological dialogue should focus on these substantial matters in dispute, and publish the arguments in support of the church's respective positions on them, side by side, instead of talking about "two lungs."

Trinitarian traditional churches, led by the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church, should forge an alliance to speak to the increasingly secular world, and work to refute the heretical message of the scourge of Moslem terror.

Look at the nice words His Beatitude John had to say about the Moslems in his Enthronement Speech.
He carefully avoided your phrase, "scourge of Moslem terror." Pope Francis will also avoid that phrase as Pope Benedict got a lot of bad press when he used a similar expression, and ultimately had to apologize to the Moslems, didn't he? Of course, many Moslems did not accept the papal apology. It made for some rough times. This is why I think he may swim toward Rome and encourage the EP and MP to do likewise.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Nephi on March 16, 2013, 12:07:16 AM
Look at the nice words His Beatitude John had to say about the Moslems in his Enthronement Speech.
He carefully avoided your phrase, "scourge of Moslem terror."
Pope Francis will also avoid that phrase as Pope Benedict got a lot of bad press when he used a similar expression, and ultimately had to apologize to the Moslems, didn't he? Of course, many Moslems did not accept the papal apology. It made for some rough times. This is why I think he may swim toward Rome and encourage the EP and MP to do likewise.

Why would HB intentionally antagonize an already violent and tumultuous region?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 16, 2013, 12:09:34 AM
Look at the nice words His Beatitude John had to say about the Moslems in his Enthronement Speech.
He carefully avoided your phrase, "scourge of Moslem terror."
Pope Francis will also avoid that phrase as Pope Benedict got a lot of bad press when he used a similar expression, and ultimately had to apologize to the Moslems, didn't he? Of course, many Moslems did not accept the papal apology. It made for some rough times. This is why I think he may swim toward Rome and encourage the EP and MP to do likewise.

Why would HB intentionally antagonize an already violent and tumultuous region?

Indeed. Why would he? Why would anyone on this earth do so. Here in the city where I live, there is a huge Moslem presence. It would be suicidal to offend them.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Nephi on March 16, 2013, 12:15:43 AM
Indeed. Why would he? Why would anyone on this earth do so. Here in the city where I live, there is a huge Moslem presence. It would be suicidal to offend them.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but my initial impression from the previous post I replied to was that he should have used strongly anti-Muslim language in his enthronement speech?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: orthonorm on March 16, 2013, 12:19:59 AM
Look at the nice words His Beatitude John had to say about the Moslems in his Enthronement Speech.
He carefully avoided your phrase, "scourge of Moslem terror."
Pope Francis will also avoid that phrase as Pope Benedict got a lot of bad press when he used a similar expression, and ultimately had to apologize to the Moslems, didn't he? Of course, many Moslems did not accept the papal apology. It made for some rough times. This is why I think he may swim toward Rome and encourage the EP and MP to do likewise.

Why would HB intentionally antagonize an already violent and tumultuous region?

Indeed. Why would he? Why would anyone on this earth do so. Here in the city where I live, there is a huge Moslem presence. It would be suicidal to offend them.

I was probably about as offensive as you could be to a Muslim today, well a Black Muslim at least. And a lot of the dangerous Black People were around when it happened.

I lived.

How exactly did this thread get to the Pope calling for a Crusade or whatever?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 16, 2013, 12:27:11 AM
However, look at these brief excerpts from HB John's Enthronement Speech.
http://www.antiochian.org/sites/antiochian.org/files/march_2013_word.pdf

Paragraph 1 - "The Holy Spirit reveals Jesus whenever HEdawns*, making Him present yet veiled in all religions and cultures."

*I think this word is a typo. Is it corrected in the PDF? I am reading from the magazine.

Paragraph 4 - "God is not pleased to see that the unity He wants for His people is shattered, and that His flock is divided into many factions."

Paragraph 8 - "Modernity is a blessing that calls us to revive the fundamentals of our worship and teachings, and also to differentiate between the one Holy Tradition and the many secondary traditions and practices to which we often cling."

~~~~~

With three sentences, I have reached my limit and so must stop quoting so as not to violate the copyright laws.

Paragraph 1 is a thinly veiled vague statement that approaches heresy.

Paragraph 4 urges unity ... we do not need a one-world religion.

Paragraph 8 really concerns me as HB John is bringing into play the Big T vs the Little t traditions ... a distinction that came about with the Roman Catholic Vatican II discussions. Modernism is rearing its ugly head here.

This Enthronement Speech sounds similar to what Pope Francis most likely will write and deliver at his installation mass. I am not ecstatic.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 16, 2013, 12:30:33 AM
Indeed. Why would he? Why would anyone on this earth do so. Here in the city where I live, there is a huge Moslem presence. It would be suicidal to offend them.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but my initial impression from the previous post I replied to was that he should have used strongly anti-Muslim language in his enthronement speech?

An internet miscommunication.

I understood what you wrote. I think. HB John lives in Syria (or Lebanon now). It would be suicidal for him to offend Moslems. He must be very careful as not only he but also his people could be wiped out.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: JamesRottnek on March 16, 2013, 12:33:22 AM
However, look at HB John's Enthronement Speech
http://www.antiochian.org/sites/antiochian.org/files/march_2013_word.pdf

Paragraph 1 - "The Holy Spirit reveals Jesus whenever HEdawns*, making Him present yet veiled in all religions and cultures."

*I think this word is a typo. Is it corrected in the PDF? I am reading from the magazine.

Paragraph 4 - "God is not pleased to see that the unity He wants for His people is shattered, an that is flock is divided into many factions."

Paragraph 8 - "Modernity is a blessing that calls us to revive the fundamentals of our worship and teachings, and also to differentiate between the one Holy Tradition and the many secondary traditions and practices to which we often cling."

~~~~~

With three sentences, I have reached my limit and so must stop quoting so as not to violate the copyright laws.

Paragraph 1 is a thinly veiled vague statement that approaches heresy.

Paragraph 4 urges unity ... we do not need a one-world religion.

Paragraph 8 really concerns me as HB John is bringing into play the Big T vs the Little t traditions ... a distinction that came about with the Roman Catholic Vatican II discussions. Modernism is rearing its ugly head here.

This Enthronement Speech sounds similar to what Pope Francis most likely will write and deliver at his installation mass. I am not ecstatic.

You overreact.  A lot.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Basil 320 on March 16, 2013, 12:34:44 AM
Not that I would encourage you to confront them or aggravate them, but it's just as suicidal not offending them because they believe if they murder you, an infidel, they will go straight to their "heaven." No reason to mince words about this ostensible "religion."  Their Prophet, a pedophile, told them on his death bed, if reasonable means do not work in attempting to convert "infidels," "Kill them with the sword."  He came a long way from his early writings when he referred to Jews and Christians as "People of the Book."  You'll recall this "religion" was founded among people who had been anathematized by the 4th Ecumenical Synod (Council).  Typically, Moslem terrorists, such as the gentlemen who flew airplanes into the World Trade Center, were yelling their absurd "Allah Akbar," as they careened into the Twin Towers.  They view their call to terror, as from their god, "allah."  The continuing growth of this "religion" is a scourge on the world.  The leading Imam in my area, who openly courted the Jewish and Christian leadership, was exposed by a secretly recored video while he had been "preaching" terrorism to his former congregation in New Jersey; thankfully, he was deported from American soil.  What do you think he's working on these days?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 16, 2013, 12:35:51 AM
However, look at HB John's Enthronement Speech
http://www.antiochian.org/sites/antiochian.org/files/march_2013_word.pdf

Paragraph 1 - "The Holy Spirit reveals Jesus whenever HEdawns*, making Him present yet veiled in all religions and cultures."

*I think this word is a typo. Is it corrected in the PDF? I am reading from the magazine.

Paragraph 4 - "God is not pleased to see that the unity He wants for His people is shattered, an that is flock is divided into many factions."

Paragraph 8 - "Modernity is a blessing that calls us to revive the fundamentals of our worship and teachings, and also to differentiate between the one Holy Tradition and the many secondary traditions and practices to which we often cling."

~~~~~

With three sentences, I have reached my limit and so must stop quoting so as not to violate the copyright laws.

Paragraph 1 is a thinly veiled vague statement that approaches heresy.

Paragraph 4 urges unity ... we do not need a one-world religion.

Paragraph 8 really concerns me as HB John is bringing into play the Big T vs the Little t traditions ... a distinction that came about with the Roman Catholic Vatican II discussions. Modernism is rearing its ugly head here.

This Enthronement Speech sounds similar to what Pope Francis most likely will write and deliver at his installation mass. I am not ecstatic.

You overreact.  A lot.

Oh really. Take a deep breath.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: orthonorm on March 16, 2013, 12:38:19 AM
However, look at HB John's Enthronement Speech (link previously posted)

Paragraph 1 - "The Holy Spirit reveals Jesus whenever HEdawns*, making Him present yet veiled in all religions and cultures."

*I think this word is a typo. Is it corrected in the PDF? I am reading from the magazine.

Paragraph 4 - "God is not pleased to see that the unity He wants for His people is shattered, an that is flock is divided into many factions."

Paragraph 8 - "Modernity is a blessing that calls us to revive the fundamentals of our worship and teachings, and also to differentiate between the one Holy Tradition and the many secondary traditions and practices to which we often cling."

~~~~~

With three sentences, I have reached my limit and so must stop quoting so as not to violate the copyright laws.

Paragraph 1 is a thinly veiled vague statement that approaches heresy.

Paragraph 4 urges unity ... we do not need a one-world religion.

Paragraph 8 really concerns me as HB John is bringing into play the Big T vs the Little t traditions ... a distinction that came about with the Roman Catholic Vatican II discussions. Modernism is rearing its ugly head here.

This Enthronement Speech sounds similar to what Pope Francis most likely will write and deliver at his installation mass. I am not ecstatic.

Maria,

Honest question.

What is the alternative to "modernism" (I'm going to go with some vague notion of how most people use it)?

Even this very question presupposes something like modernity at work.

I really cannot understand these blanket rejections of "modernism". It would be like me bemoaning that fourth century Athenians were not Ming Dynasty Chinese.

It makes no sense.

The real question is what are the real problems, in a relatively neutral sense, of modernity and how within modernity can they be addressed, if at all.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 16, 2013, 12:39:01 AM
Not that I would encourage you to confront them or aggravate them, but it's just as suicidal not offending them because they believe if they murder you, an infidel, they will go straight to their "heaven." No reason to mince words about this ostensible "religion."  Their Prophet, a pedophile, told them on his death bed, if reasonable means do not work in attempting to convert "infidels," "Kill them with the sword."  He came a long way from his early writings when he referred to Jews and Christians as "People of the Book."  You'll recall this "religion" was founded among people who had been anathematized by the 4th Ecumenical Synod (Council).  Typically, Moslem terrorists, such as the gentlemen who flew airplanes into the World Trade Center, were yelling their absurd "Allah Akbar," as they careened into the Twin Towers.  They view their call to terror, as from their god, "allah."  The continuing growth of this "religion" is a scourge on the world.  The leading Imam in my area, who openly courted the Jewish and Christian leadership, was exposed by a secretly recored video while he had been "preaching" terrorism to his former congregation in New Jersey; thankfully, he was deported from American soil.  What do you think he's working on these days?

We all need to be prepared to meet Christ at the Pearly Gates sooner or later.

Yes, we live in dangerous times, but we should not deny our faith to save our lives, or preach heresy that leads to damnation in order to appease those who hate Christ.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: orthonorm on March 16, 2013, 12:39:19 AM
Not that I would encourage you to confront them or aggravate them, but it's just as suicidal not offending them because they believe if they murder you, an infidel, they will go straight to their "heaven." No reason to mince words about this ostensible "religion."  Their Prophet, a pedophile, told them on his death bed, if reasonable means do not work in attempting to convert "infidels," "Kill them with the sword."  He came a long way from his early writings when he referred to Jews and Christians as "People of the Book."  You'll recall this "religion" was founded among people who had been anathematized by the 4th Ecumenical Synod (Council).  Typically, Moslem terrorists, such as the gentlemen who flew airplanes into the World Trade Center, were yelling their absurd "Allah Akbar," as they careened into the Twin Towers.  They view their call to terror, as from their god, "allah."  The continuing growth of this "religion" is a scourge on the world.  The leading Imam in my area, who openly courted the Jewish and Christian leadership, was exposed by a secretly recored video while he had been "preaching" terrorism to his former congregation in New Jersey; thankfully, he was deported from American soil.  What do you think he's working on these days?

I take it you're not a golfer?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Basil 320 on March 16, 2013, 12:42:40 AM
I don't get it.  (I used to golf.)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 16, 2013, 12:43:12 AM
However, look at HB John's Enthronement Speech (link previously posted)

Paragraph 1 - "The Holy Spirit reveals Jesus whenever HEdawns*, making Him present yet veiled in all religions and cultures."

*I think this word is a typo. Is it corrected in the PDF? I am reading from the magazine.

Paragraph 4 - "God is not pleased to see that the unity He wants for His people is shattered, an that is flock is divided into many factions."

Paragraph 8 - "Modernity is a blessing that calls us to revive the fundamentals of our worship and teachings, and also to differentiate between the one Holy Tradition and the many secondary traditions and practices to which we often cling."

~~~~~

With three sentences, I have reached my limit and so must stop quoting so as not to violate the copyright laws.

Paragraph 1 is a thinly veiled vague statement that approaches heresy.

Paragraph 4 urges unity ... we do not need a one-world religion.

Paragraph 8 really concerns me as HB John is bringing into play the Big T vs the Little t traditions ... a distinction that came about with the Roman Catholic Vatican II discussions. Modernism is rearing its ugly head here.

This Enthronement Speech sounds similar to what Pope Francis most likely will write and deliver at his installation mass. I am not ecstatic.

Maria,

Honest question.

What is the alternative to "modernism" (I'm going to go with some vague notion of how most people use it)?

Even this very question presupposes something like modernity at work.

I really cannot understand these blanket rejections of "modernism". It would be like me bemoaning that fourth century Athenians were not Ming Dynasty Chinese.

It makes no sense.

The real question is what are the real problems, in a relatively neutral sense, of modernity and how within modernity can they be addressed, if at all.

Good question: What is modernity and modernism?

I was thinking that this should be the start of a new thread.

I will start the thread and then link it to this post.

So, here it is: http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,50529.new.html#new
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: William on March 16, 2013, 01:08:03 AM
However, look at HB John's Enthronement Speech
http://www.antiochian.org/sites/antiochian.org/files/march_2013_word.pdf

Paragraph 1 - "The Holy Spirit reveals Jesus whenever HEdawns*, making Him present yet veiled in all religions and cultures."

*I think this word is a typo. Is it corrected in the PDF? I am reading from the magazine.

Paragraph 4 - "God is not pleased to see that the unity He wants for His people is shattered, an that is flock is divided into many factions."

Paragraph 8 - "Modernity is a blessing that calls us to revive the fundamentals of our worship and teachings, and also to differentiate between the one Holy Tradition and the many secondary traditions and practices to which we often cling."

~~~~~

With three sentences, I have reached my limit and so must stop quoting so as not to violate the copyright laws.

Paragraph 1 is a thinly veiled vague statement that approaches heresy.

Paragraph 4 urges unity ... we do not need a one-world religion.

Paragraph 8 really concerns me as HB John is bringing into play the Big T vs the Little t traditions ... a distinction that came about with the Roman Catholic Vatican II discussions. Modernism is rearing its ugly head here.

This Enthronement Speech sounds similar to what Pope Francis most likely will write and deliver at his installation mass. I am not ecstatic.

You overreact.  A lot.

By saying "I'm not ecstatic"?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: stanley123 on March 16, 2013, 03:31:20 AM
venial sin

This isn't a cause of division.

Quote
Purgatory

While this has been a cause of division since the 15th century, with how little has actually been dogmatically defined by both sides, I don't think this particular point is beyond reconciling.
I am interested to know why an Orthodox Christian thinks that  the Roman belief in venial sin and Purgatory is not a cause of division between the RC and Orthodox Church? In the Roman Church, if you die in the state of grace, but with a venial sin on your soul, you will go to Purgatory for some time. Your time in Purgatory may be reduced somewhat by the prayers of the faithful on earth, but in any case, you are assured of salvation. Additionally, even if you sincerely repented and confessed a serious sin, you would be saved but still, most likely, you might have to spend some time in Purgatory before entering heaven. I didn't think that this RC teaching would be reconcilable with Orthodox teaching, but you seem to say that I was wrong in that assumption?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Basil 320 on March 16, 2013, 04:36:01 AM
Purgatory and all beliefs related to it, are stumbling blocks to unity.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: LBK on March 16, 2013, 04:39:07 AM
Purgatory and all beliefs related to it, are stumbling blocks to unity.

Seconded.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Alpo on March 16, 2013, 05:10:25 AM
Purgatory and all beliefs related to it, are stumbling blocks to unity.

Seconded.

Not that Purgatory what present RCC officially teaches. Historical Purgatory on the other hand...
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Basil 320 on March 16, 2013, 06:32:42 AM
Well, Eastern Orthodox Church Fathers teach that upon passing from this life, passing from the "Church Militant" to the "Church Triumphant," the soul receives a "Partial Judgment" and experiences a "foretaste" of the determination that will be made at the "Final Judgement."  The soul does not experience time during this state. While Church Fathers encourage the faithful in this life to pray for those reposed, even asserting that the soul may sense a "temporary reprieve" from the prayers of the living, in their writings the Church Fathers acknowledge that they do not know whether these prayers will necessarily be efficacious, not-with-standing God's Judgement, because the effective result of prayers for the departed has no scriptural support.  Fathers also teach that the "Church Militant" and the "Church Triumphant" join together in worship, "among the saints."  The Orthodox Church does not teach of a state of existence in a "Purgatory;" "the purging of sins," none of the Roman Catholic teaching about Purgatory is taught in the Orthodox Church, neither does the word "purgatory" exist in Orthodox ecclesial terminology.

This morning the church observes the 2nd Saturday of the Souls, with a memorial Trisagion Service following the Divine Liturgy.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 16, 2013, 07:17:49 AM
I hope he railroads the granting of Patriarchal status to the UGCC.

At the beginning of next month, Pope Francis is going to proclaim a Ukrainian Patriarchate and an SSPX Patriarchate.

I'd love to see an SSPX Patriarchate






so I can anathemize it  ;D ;D ;D
Seriously dude, not all SSPXers are the monsters you make them out to be. Some are very humble, holy people.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Peter J on March 16, 2013, 07:37:10 AM
 ;D

Anyway, do you think the new Pope is really going to head towards a reunion?  People have been overanalyzing his initial speech and it suggest that he would like to emphasize on himself as the Bishop of the Diocese of Rome, rather than the Pope of the entire Catholic Church.  Definitely the Orthodox welcome that.
Yes, I think Pope Francis will work toward reunion and a one-world religion,

Hey don't make me come over there!

But seriously, we (Catholics) don't encourage Orthodox to swim-the-Tiber. That's not just my personal policy, it's right in the Balamand Statement. (Of course, that's not to say that we discourage Orthodox from doing so.)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Peter J on March 16, 2013, 07:38:39 AM

Anyway, do you think the new Pope is really going to head towards a reunion?  People have been overanalyzing his initial speech and it suggest that he would like to emphasize on himself as the Bishop of the Diocese of Rome, rather than the Pope of the entire Catholic Church.  Definitely the Orthodox welcome that.

Yes, I think Pope Francis will work toward reunion and a one-world religion, but it will be a false reunion because of his heavy involvement with the Charismatic Renewal, the Pentecostal Movement, and annual Chanukah services. I would not be surprised if the Antiochian Patriarch of Antioch approaches the Pope and seeks a reunion too. In fact, Patriarch John might be the first one to swim across the Mediterranean Sea.




Except that "With God, all things are possible," not under any circumstances can I imagine unification between the Roman Catholic Church and the  Eastern Orthodox Church, not-with-standing the "Dialogue of Love" and the ecumenical lingo, i.e. "the two lungs," etc., the Roman Catholic Church is not going to renounce its innovative teaching and doctrine, like its Papal unilateral addition of non-scripturally based language to the 9th Article of the "Symbol of Faith," that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father "and the Son" (Filioque); that a single bishop of the church is infallible when he speaks "Ex Cathedra;" that the Mother of God was conceived immaculately; etc.  Likewise, the Eastern Orthodox Church will never abandon Holy Tradition and compromise on these issues.  To paraphrase Patriarch Bartholomew, who, during his visit to America in 1997, spoke the following words at Georgetown University, "While we share a 1,000 common history, we have also lived apart during another 1,000 years."

A serious and respectful theological dialogue should focus on these substantial matters in dispute, and publish the arguments in support of the church's respective positions on them, side by side, instead of talking about "two lungs."

Trinitarian traditional churches, led by the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church, should forge an alliance to speak to the increasingly secular world, and work to refute the heretical message of the scourge of Moslem terror.

Look at the nice words His Beatitude John had to say about the Moslems in his Enthronement Speech.
He carefully avoided your phrase, "scourge of Moslem terror." Pope Francis will also avoid that phrase as Pope Benedict got a lot of bad press when he used a similar expression, and ultimately had to apologize to the Moslems, didn't he? Of course, many Moslems did not accept the papal apology. It made for some rough times. This is why I think he may swim toward Rome and encourage the EP and MP to do likewise.

That's why you think he may swim toward Rome and encourage the EP and MP to do likewise?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: James2 on March 16, 2013, 07:51:56 AM
However, look at HB John's Enthronement Speech
http://www.antiochian.org/sites/antiochian.org/files/march_2013_word.pdf

Paragraph 1 - "The Holy Spirit reveals Jesus whenever HEdawns*, making Him present yet veiled in all religions and cultures."

*I think this word is a typo. Is it corrected in the PDF? I am reading from the magazine.

Paragraph 4 - "God is not pleased to see that the unity He wants for His people is shattered, an that is flock is divided into many factions."

Paragraph 8 - "Modernity is a blessing that calls us to revive the fundamentals of our worship and teachings, and also to differentiate between the one Holy Tradition and the many secondary traditions and practices to which we often cling."

~~~~~

With three sentences, I have reached my limit and so must stop quoting so as not to violate the copyright laws.

Paragraph 1 is a thinly veiled vague statement that approaches heresy.

Paragraph 4 urges unity ... we do not need a one-world religion.

Paragraph 8 really concerns me as HB John is bringing into play the Big T vs the Little t traditions ... a distinction that came about with the Roman Catholic Vatican II discussions. Modernism is rearing its ugly head here.

This Enthronement Speech sounds similar to what Pope Francis most likely will write and deliver at his installation mass. I am not ecstatic.

You overreact.  A lot.

By saying "I'm not ecstatic"?

By jumping to conclusions that the text doesn't really support and putting a negative spin on statements that bear other interpretations.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 16, 2013, 08:04:19 AM
http://www.sspx.org/chapel_news/march_for_life_2013/march_for_life_2013.htm

(http://www.sspx.org/chapel_news/march_for_life_2013/101_3841_small.jpg)

I find it kind of humorous that women are carrying a banner of a priestly society.
why?

would it be humorous if laymen were holding it? Nuns?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Papist on March 16, 2013, 08:04:19 AM
Buddy, you have a real axe to grind.

To be fair, the SSPX have a pretty big ax to grind too.

Of course they don't.  C'mon, they're always right and everyone else is always wrong.  ;)
Come on man, you know very well that there are various kinds of SSPX members. I know a very kind priest who was a vicar at my parish before he went SSPX. His defection to the SSPX does not make him any less a kind and generous man than does your conversion to Eastern Orthodoxy. Do I agree with everything the SSPX does? Of course not. But they have a good reason to be upset about the modern state of the Church. Have some mercy on these people. Sure, some are jerks, but you'll find jerks in any group. But some are simply trying to follow their consciences, and live the Catholic faith as it has been lived and taught for centuries. BTW, rebuking Popes, and criticizing their pastoral decisions, and personal theology is not a novelty. I seem to remember St. Catherine of Sienna, among others, being quite tough on certain Popes. Heck, Dante even put some Popes in hell in his Divine Comedy.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 16, 2013, 08:05:59 AM
However, look at these brief excerpts from HB John's Enthronement Speech.
http://www.antiochian.org/sites/antiochian.org/files/march_2013_word.pdf

Paragraph 1 - "The Holy Spirit reveals Jesus whenever HEdawns*, making Him present yet veiled in all religions and cultures."

*I think this word is a typo. Is it corrected in the PDF? I am reading from the magazine.

Paragraph 4 - "God is not pleased to see that the unity He wants for His people is shattered, and that His flock is divided into many factions."

Paragraph 8 - "Modernity is a blessing that calls us to revive the fundamentals of our worship and teachings, and also to differentiate between the one Holy Tradition and the many secondary traditions and practices to which we often cling."

~~~~~

With three sentences, I have reached my limit and so must stop quoting so as not to violate the copyright laws.

Paragraph 1 is a thinly veiled vague statement that approaches heresy.
Read Romans 1. And Phillipians 4:8.

Paragraph 4 urges unity ... we do not need a one-world religion.
How about respect for canonical boundaries? Like, say, Jerusalem not intruding on Antioch?
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,50416.0.html

Paragraph 8 really concerns me as HB John is bringing into play the Big T vs the Little t traditions ... a distinction that came about with the Roman Catholic Vatican II discussions. Modernism is rearing its ugly head here.
Quote
God is not pleased when He sees us clinging
to the letter of things, emptying the letter of spirit and life. We know that the Church is alive by
the Holy spirit, and through Whom, it has survived throughout history. Ecclesial tradition is
not something motionless or stagnant, but a tool
of salvation and a way to understand the divine
sacrament. We live at a time in which tradition
is often rejected, and this negatively affects our
youth. Our Church is concerned with the developments of our time because Jesus Christ wants
it to be His witness at all times. Following up on
a time like ours requires wiping off the dust that,
due to our sins, has accumulated on our tradition
throughout the centuries. It also requires working to reveal what is authentic in it...[your quote]...The witness of the Church, at this
age, is to discern and make choices. modernity
offers many opportunities. We must resort to the
good in it to regain our people who are getting
increasingly attracted by prevailing globalization. Our Church must not fear to use the methods available in our time to modernise its practices, to build bridges towards its children, and
to learn to speak their language. this is what the
holy fathers did when they used Greek philosophy, which was widespread in their time, to convey the message of the Gospel in a language that
the people understood. We have to follow their
example if we are to remain faithful in transmitting the message. the challenge lies in making
the life of Jesus Christ glow in our faces, in our
worship, and in all the aspects of our Church that
the people may find their salvation in it. Finally,
renewal is not only to modernise the texts and to
make them understandable in the language of our
time, but to renew the human soul and bring it
closer to the face of Jesus. All its attention must
be in His direction. Only then will modernisation
interact with the human heart and lead to the salvation of man.
Tradition is not parroting the dead faith of the living.

This Enthronement Speech sounds similar to what Pope Francis most likely will write and deliver at his installation mass. I am not ecstatic.
You seem, as shown by your editing of para. 8, to be looking for problems.

Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Peter J on March 16, 2013, 09:53:43 AM
Quote
Not that its happening, but would a Byzantine/Eastern Catholic Pope
Unfortunately, that will never happen....ever.

I agree that it's probably not going to happen, but I'm not sure that's a bad thing.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Peter J on March 16, 2013, 10:29:14 AM
http://www.sspx.org/chapel_news/march_for_life_2013/march_for_life_2013.htm

(http://www.sspx.org/chapel_news/march_for_life_2013/101_3841_small.jpg)

I find it kind of humorous that women are carrying a banner of a priestly society.
why?

would it be humorous if laymen were holding it? Nuns?

Meh, lighten up, it was a pretty good joke.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 16, 2013, 11:20:15 AM
I hope he railroads the granting of Patriarchal status to the UGCC.

At the beginning of next month, Pope Francis is going to proclaim a Ukrainian Patriarchate and an SSPX Patriarchate.

I'd love to see an SSPX Patriarchate






so I can anathemize it  ;D ;D ;D
Seriously dude, not all SSPXers are the monsters you make them out to be. Some are very humble, holy people.

Of course there is.  But they're like kind and courteous Customs and Border Patrol Agents.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: orthros on March 16, 2013, 11:20:24 AM
The Orthodox do recognize this election, right? Even though we arent in communion, don't we still recognize him officially as the Bishop of Rome?

I don't think that you do, although I could be mistaken.  Didn't someone else post a picture of the Orthodox Bishop of Rome as a snarky rejoinder to the implication that we were all sedevacantists for a time?
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 16, 2013, 11:20:50 AM
Purgatory and all beliefs related to it, are stumbling blocks to unity.

Seconded.

Thirded  ;D :D
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: choy on March 16, 2013, 11:25:58 AM
I am interested to know why an Orthodox Christian thinks that  the Roman belief in venial sin and Purgatory is not a cause of division between the RC and Orthodox Church? In the Roman Church, if you die in the state of grace, but with a venial sin on your soul, you will go to Purgatory for some time. Your time in Purgatory may be reduced somewhat by the prayers of the faithful on earth, but in any case, you are assured of salvation. Additionally, even if you sincerely repented and confessed a serious sin, you would be saved but still, most likely, you might have to spend some time in Purgatory before entering heaven. I didn't think that this RC teaching would be reconcilable with Orthodox teaching, but you seem to say that I was wrong in that assumption?

Venial sin is not an obstacle to unity.  While the Orthodox would reject the legalism behind the concept of "venial" and "mortal" sin, there is nothing objectively wrong about the theology behind venial sins.

Purgatory is incompatible with the entire Orthodox belief on salvation.  While we do believe that one needs to be purified, that purification or purgation is not a spiritual fire where one experiences pain and suffering.  Also, we do not believe in sins being forgiven and yet you still need to go through the pain of purgatory.  When God forgives, He forgives completely.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Fabio Leite on March 16, 2013, 12:16:17 PM
One world religion, like one world government is not a conspiracy of shadowy groups or of any group in particular. It's a value, a cultural trend and probably innevitable. It won't be a religion per se probably but an attitude toward any religion that relativizes it. Anyone who acts or thinks that their religion is more "true" than the others will be socially marginalized, put to jail or killed depending on the strictness of the laws of each country.

The concept that in being a member of the Orthodox Church, and of the Orthodox Church only, you are literally a member of the Body of Christ participating in His incarnation, crucifiction and resurrection will make you liable to one of those three destinies, for all differences will be considered to be just man-made.

I still do not know what to think of Pope Francis. I like what I hear about his humble ways, but a friend has correctly pointed out that all this humbleness has been carefully performed in front of cameras both now and in Argentina as a bishop. I've read and seen videos where too he is a bit too willing to participate in other religions cerimonies. This Hanukkah (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkeaWNH2kCE) with the presence of even the syncretic afro-brazilian umbandists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umbanda) seems a prophanation even of the Jewish cerimony itself. This sort of thing is what "one world religion" will look like. More and more not participating in this kind of thing will be liable to some sort of social or actual punishment, more and more the subtext that "we all worship the same God" will be spread and that "fraternal love" is all that is necessary and that there is no such thing as theological truth, just vanity of intellectuals.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: James2 on March 16, 2013, 12:31:38 PM
I think traditionalists overstate how many people are like them in the Roman church. But a trickle of TLM attendes is better than nothing, and you will eventually reach a low threshold. You also have to remember, the old Rite was effectively abolished for an entire generation. Until the advent of indult masses in 1984, it was nearly impossible to attend the old Rite Mass in full communion with the Pope. The damage was done, much as England could never really go back to Sarum when Queen Mary succeeded Elizabeth. Protestantizing bishops - from Cranmer on down - brought in the new order and the old one was out.

Mary didn't succeed Elizabeth.  Mary succeeded their brother Edward VI, and Elizabeth succeeded Mary.  While there certainly was much damage (spiritual and physical) done under the Protestant Edward, Mary's five-year reign did indeed see the restoration of Catholic worship.  It was then dismantled under Elizabeth.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 16, 2013, 01:53:51 PM
;D

Anyway, do you think the new Pope is really going to head towards a reunion?  People have been overanalyzing his initial speech and it suggest that he would like to emphasize on himself as the Bishop of the Diocese of Rome, rather than the Pope of the entire Catholic Church.  Definitely the Orthodox welcome that.
Yes, I think Pope Francis will work toward reunion and a one-world religion,

Hey don't make me come over there!

But seriously, we (Catholics) don't encourage Orthodox to swim-the-Tiber. That's not just my personal policy, it's right in the Balamand Statement. (Of course, that's not to say that we discourage Orthodox from doing so.)

Catholic Answers and other Catholic apologists, particularly Scott Butler, have been claiming that they are converting the Orthodox Christians to Catholicism, including some priests. Here in Los Angeles, I know quite a few Orthodox Christians who converted to Catholicism so that their own children could attend the Catholic school and receive a discount. Many Greeks tend to have large families, and a discount helps them financially. They actually like the NO (politically corrected OF) mass because it is shorter (15 to 30 min.) and in English.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Peter J on March 16, 2013, 03:05:55 PM
;D

Anyway, do you think the new Pope is really going to head towards a reunion?  People have been overanalyzing his initial speech and it suggest that he would like to emphasize on himself as the Bishop of the Diocese of Rome, rather than the Pope of the entire Catholic Church.  Definitely the Orthodox welcome that.
Yes, I think Pope Francis will work toward reunion and a one-world religion,

Hey don't make me come over there!

But seriously, we (Catholics) don't encourage Orthodox to swim-the-Tiber. That's not just my personal policy, it's right in the Balamand Statement. (Of course, that's not to say that we discourage Orthodox from doing so.)

Catholic Answers and other Catholic apologists, particularly Scott Butler, have been claiming that they are converting the Orthodox Christians to Catholicism, including some priests.

I believe it.

However, their particular policy doesn't change the Balamand Statement. The Balamand Statement still represents a significant change in our policy toward Orthodox, even if it hasn't brought about a complete 180°.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Benjamin the Red on March 16, 2013, 04:56:35 PM
However, look at HB John's Enthronement Speech
http://www.antiochian.org/sites/antiochian.org/files/march_2013_word.pdf

Paragraph 1 - "The Holy Spirit reveals Jesus whenever HEdawns*, making Him present yet veiled in all religions and cultures."

*I think this word is a typo. Is it corrected in the PDF? I am reading from the magazine.

Paragraph 4 - "God is not pleased to see that the unity He wants for His people is shattered, an that is flock is divided into many factions."

Paragraph 8 - "Modernity is a blessing that calls us to revive the fundamentals of our worship and teachings, and also to differentiate between the one Holy Tradition and the many secondary traditions and practices to which we often cling."

~~~~~

With three sentences, I have reached my limit and so must stop quoting so as not to violate the copyright laws.

Paragraph 1 is a thinly veiled vague statement that approaches heresy.

Paragraph 4 urges unity ... we do not need a one-world religion.

Paragraph 8 really concerns me as HB John is bringing into play the Big T vs the Little t traditions ... a distinction that came about with the Roman Catholic Vatican II discussions. Modernism is rearing its ugly head here.

This Enthronement Speech sounds similar to what Pope Francis most likely will write and deliver at his installation mass. I am not ecstatic.

You overreact.  A lot.

By saying "I'm not ecstatic"?

Her quote from paragraph 1 is essentially a quote from St. Justin Martyr, and hardly a heresy.

Paragraph 4, I don't much care for. He seems to lean towards the Roman Catholic view, and even uses the term, "sister Church". I'd like to hear more from His Beatitude about how he'd define "the Church", and whether he does indeed take the RC view, or sticks with the Orthodox perspective.

Paragraph 8 doesn't bother me. I think it's important to talk about those things which are culturally important versus those things which are essential to our Orthodox faith. The Church is trying really hard, and succeeding, in spreading to new cultures and becoming indigenous. After being bound to its cultures for so long, I think reflecting on this is a good thing. Not that cultural traditions should be dispensed with, and certainly not that we should be as liturgically free as the post-Vatican II Romans, mind you.

I'm not a big fan of Antioch. They've been on a more liberal side of things for quite some time. That said, they are Orthodox, and I don't see them abandoning the Church to swim the Tiber.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 16, 2013, 07:43:06 PM
Hello, Stanley.

First off the Catholic Church has always allowed a certain freedom in theological thought. Eastern Catholics also share the Orthodox understanding of these and other theological questions.

Secondly, since Orthodoxy is the only real answer, I must submit my will and intellect to her teachings.

If your problem is that you want the pre-Vatican II I Church, you will not find it in Orthodoxy.

Fixed it for you.

Orthodoxy is definitely pre-Vatican I and pre-Council of Trent. It was founded in 33 A.D.

That was my point.  When I was Eastern Catholic it was the same problem.  Some traddies will show up trying to search for the Pre-Vatican II Church.  While our priests faced east and chanted (for the most part), we don't kneel, we don't use Latin, and we were under the same Pope.  Same with Orthodoxy.  One really has to want the ancient Church and the ancient faith, the one that has been there from the beginning, to become Orthodox, not merely a pre-Vatican II or pre-Vatican I Roman Catholic Church.  I don't know how many traddies would go pre-Trent, Trent has always been the epitome of traditionalism according to the traditionalists.

This has always bugged me a bit. There seems to be a tendency to assume that there was no Church before Trent or St. Thomas Aquinas. Catholic "traditionalism" only seems to go back to about the 13th century.
LOL.  There's reason for that: go much further back, and you start to stray back into Orthodoxy.

Westerner who learns his own church's history>Orthodox catechumen.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 16, 2013, 07:43:06 PM

Anyway, do you think the new Pope is really going to head towards a reunion?  People have been overanalyzing his initial speech and it suggest that he would like to emphasize on himself as the Bishop of the Diocese of Rome, rather than the Pope of the entire Catholic Church.  Definitely the Orthodox welcome that.

Yes, I think Pope Francis will work toward reunion and a one-world religion, but it will be a false reunion because of his heavy involvement with the Charismatic Renewal, the Pentecostal Movement, and annual Chanukah services. I would not be surprised if the Antiochian Patriarch of Antioch approaches the Pope and seeks a reunion too. In fact, Patriarch John might be the first one to swim across the Mediterranean Sea.
Why would he do that?  The Melkite Pat. Gregory of Antioch doesn't like leaving the shores of the Gulf of Iskandarun, why should HB Pat. John X of Antioch want to swim out and drown.  (the melkite patriarch, btw, has been offered a cardinal's hat, but has refused it).

I'd worry more about the Vatican educated (the Antiochians have the only Orthodox Church run University in the World) HAH EP Bartholomew.  And even I don't find that likely.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 16, 2013, 07:43:06 PM
Look at the nice words His Beatitude John had to say about the Moslems in his Enthronement Speech.
He carefully avoided your phrase, "scourge of Moslem terror."
Pope Francis will also avoid that phrase as Pope Benedict got a lot of bad press when he used a similar expression, and ultimately had to apologize to the Moslems, didn't he? Of course, many Moslems did not accept the papal apology. It made for some rough times. This is why I think he may swim toward Rome and encourage the EP and MP to do likewise.

Why would HB intentionally antagonize an already violent and tumultuous region?

Indeed. Why would he? Why would anyone on this earth do so. Here in the city where I live, there is a huge Moslem presence. It would be suicidal to offend them.

I was probably about as offensive as you could be to a Muslim today, well a Black Muslim at least. And a lot of the dangerous Black People were around when it happened.

I lived.

Ohio isn't in the midst of the Dar al-Islam.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Alpo on March 17, 2013, 08:48:07 AM
would it be humorous if laymen were holding it? Nuns?

Well yes in case of nuns. It's like vegetarians carrying meat advertisement.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 17, 2013, 11:28:17 AM
would it be humorous if laymen were holding it? Nuns?

Well yes in case of nuns. It's like vegetarians carrying meat advertisement.

How so?

The Catholic sisters and nuns I knew in my youth were supportive of the male priesthood, but today's so-called Catholic "nuns" want to be priests, so they very often despise Catholic priests due to their rebellious arrogance. In addition, these lay sisters are not really nuns because they are not cloistered, and yes, they are lay sisters because they are members of the laity.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 17, 2013, 11:32:40 AM

Anyway, do you think the new Pope is really going to head towards a reunion?  People have been overanalyzing his initial speech and it suggest that he would like to emphasize on himself as the Bishop of the Diocese of Rome, rather than the Pope of the entire Catholic Church.  Definitely the Orthodox welcome that.

Yes, I think Pope Francis will work toward reunion and a one-world religion, but it will be a false reunion because of his heavy involvement with the Charismatic Renewal, the Pentecostal Movement, and annual Chanukah services. I would not be surprised if the Antiochian Patriarch of Antioch approaches the Pope and seeks a reunion too. In fact, Patriarch John might be the first one to swim across the Mediterranean Sea.
Why would he do that?  The Melkite Pat. Gregory of Antioch doesn't like leaving the shores of the Gulf of Iskandarun, why should HB Pat. John X of Antioch want to swim out and drown.  (the melkite patriarch, btw, has been offered a cardinal's hat, but has refused it).

I'd worry more about the Vatican educated (the Antiochians have the only Orthodox Church run University in the World) HAH EP Bartholomew.  And even I don't find that likely.

Good for the Melkite Patriarch. He sees the schizophrenia of being Eastern Catholic and wearing the dreadful cardinal red. Would that he would become fully Orthodox.

The Maronite Patriarch and other Eastern Cardinal-Patriarchs have totally bought into this latinization schizophrenia that the Vatican Congregations have forced upon them.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Maria on March 17, 2013, 11:33:51 AM
I hope he railroads the granting of Patriarchal status to the UGCC.

At the beginning of next month, Pope Francis is going to proclaim a Ukrainian Patriarchate and an SSPX Patriarchate.

I'd love to see an SSPX Patriarchate






so I can anathemize it  ;D ;D ;D
Seriously dude, not all SSPXers are the monsters you make them out to be. Some are very humble, holy people.

True. We are not to judge.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Peter J on March 17, 2013, 05:50:32 PM

Anyway, do you think the new Pope is really going to head towards a reunion?  People have been overanalyzing his initial speech and it suggest that he would like to emphasize on himself as the Bishop of the Diocese of Rome, rather than the Pope of the entire Catholic Church.  Definitely the Orthodox welcome that.

Yes, I think Pope Francis will work toward reunion and a one-world religion, but it will be a false reunion because of his heavy involvement with the Charismatic Renewal, the Pentecostal Movement, and annual Chanukah services. I would not be surprised if the Antiochian Patriarch of Antioch approaches the Pope and seeks a reunion too. In fact, Patriarch John might be the first one to swim across the Mediterranean Sea.
Why would he do that?  The Melkite Pat. Gregory of Antioch doesn't like leaving the shores of the Gulf of Iskandarun, why should HB Pat. John X of Antioch want to swim out and drown.  (the melkite patriarch, btw, has been offered a cardinal's hat, but has refused it).

I don't know if he has been offered a cardinal's hat, but it seems certain that he would refuse one.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Virtual Paradise on March 17, 2013, 06:07:05 PM
https://twitter.com/YolandaDeMena/status/300923731092598786
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: mike on March 17, 2013, 06:12:27 PM
https://twitter.com/YolandaDeMena/status/300923731092598786

Do not share naked urls. Quote a part of the content or describe what is there.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Virtual Paradise on March 17, 2013, 06:17:10 PM
https://twitter.com/YolandaDeMena/status/300923731092598786

Do not share naked urls. Quote a part of the content or describe what is there.

I meant to post that as an image, but didn't work. Apparently that person claimed on 11 Feb on her twitter that her boyfriend had a dream that Pope Benedict would resign and a new Pope with the name Francisc I will take his place.
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: ialmisry on March 17, 2013, 07:10:56 PM
Congratulation to all Roman Catholics! I really like (St.)* Francis of Assissi and I see it as a good sign that the new Pope of Rome chose that name. May Christ give him strength.


*no idea what's the forum policy about non-Orthodox sanctity titles, someone please enlighten me
on EWTN (you guys get that in Europe? It's the conservative channel of the Vatican's followers) they say it was Francis Xavier, the Jesuit who instituted the Inquisition in Asia.
It's official: the name comes from their saint of Assissi:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=t2XiT76tgCo
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Shiny on March 23, 2013, 07:06:07 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/SlwdAjA.jpg)
Title: Re: Conclave and a New Pope
Post by: Shiny on March 24, 2013, 05:39:58 AM
Bill Maher spent a second week ending "Real Time" by slamming Pope Francis, this time focusing on the media's fascination with the new pope.

"I have just about had it with the press squealing in delight with everything the new pope does," Maher said. "He's a 76-year-old executive who just got a promotion. You act like he's a baby who just made a boom-boom."

"There are over a billion Catholics -- just on the back of my gardener's truck," Maher said, to some applause and even a few boos. "So I get it that this is a legitimate news story. But can we at least stop saying that the job of pope is so hard?"

He even compared the Church to his own show.

"The Catholic Church has basically always done what we do here at 'Real Time.' It's a bunch of guys sitting around making up new rules."

Maher, who was raised Catholic and is now an outspoken voice against religion, is unlikely to stop his criticism of the pope or the Catholic Church anytime soon. Check out the clip above to see his rant against the new pope.

More here with video clip: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/23/bill-maher-slams-pope-francis-media_n_2940467.html