Black Pope could follow Barack Obama's election, says US archbishop

[OutinChgoburbs]

I was hoping for Cardinal Arinze the last time to become Pope.

May His Holiness Pope Benedict live a long and fruitful life, but may Cardinal Arinze live long after him as the Holy Father.

 

[Soutane]

Of course not.

One is chosen by mere mortals, one by God.

EXACTLY!When our Lord decides on the correct Pope for the times he just may happen to be coincidently black.There is no “affirmative action” in the Catholic Church.

 

[Lance]

Well, the Pope himself sent a personal telegram to Obama, congratulating him on this, calling it a “historic occasion”. You do not have to agree with someone to still wish them well. Obama needs our prayers to guide this country in the right direction, and that he will see the light, in regards to abortion.

Calling it “a great step for humanity” goes a lot beyond just congratulating him. I stand by my statement.

 

[Gaurdian]

I am hoping all these quotes are misquotes. How could a Catholic Bishop look at the world through this color prism like this. I thought he would be above this type of stereotype?

"Archbishop Gregory said that the next time cardinals gathered to elect a Pope they could “in their wisdom” choose an black pontiff. “My own election as head of the U.S. Bishops Conference was an important signal. In 2001, the American bishops elected someone they respected regardless of his race, and the same thing could happen with the election of a Pope.”

Can anyone from Atlanta chime in on this? Does Archbishop Gregory support Obama?

 

[tm30]

The election of Barack Obama as the first African-American US President could pave the way for the election of the first black Pope, according to a leading black American Catholic.

Not surprisingly, Bishop Gregory was among the 200 or so American bishops who remained SILENT on the issue of abortion as the election approached. And now he seems to think that the election of a pope takes its cue from the whims of the American electorate.

But really, if Hitler were a black man, would his ascendancy to power be looked at as a great thing for humanity? Why wasn’t the appointment of another black man, Clarence Thomas, to the Supreme Court, hailed as a great day for humanity? Or when Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice were given unpredented roles in the executive branch - roles that not even President Clinton extended to people of color in his administration - why were THOSE appointments not considered great moments for humanity? Why did Alan Keyes get short shrift for all these years?

It’s a terrible day for humanity, and it has nothing to do with the color of anyone’s skin. Anyone who thinks otherwise has been bedazzled by the glare of a world where virtue has run amok and become political correctness at any cost. A nation that still can’t wash away the guilt of slavery and segregation just validated the enslavery (embryo freezing) and murder (abortion) of millions of its own citizens, and this is a good thing?

When Obama signs FOCA, will Gregory call it a great day for humanity? When he orders gov’t funding of embryo stem cell research, will he call it a great day for humanity? When he stuffs the court with leftist, deconstructionist justices, will he call it a great day for humanity?

Benedict XVI, as a shepherd of all the world’s Catholics, properly congratulated the elected leader of the most influential nation in the world. Bishop Gregory is opening Obama’s cause for sainthood. One is protocol. The other is profane.

 

[Lance]

I am hoping all these quotes are misquotes. How could a Catholic Bishop look at the world through this color prism like this. I thought he would be above this type of stereotype?

"Archbishop Gregory said that the next time cardinals gathered to elect a Pope they could “in their wisdom” choose an black pontiff. “My own election as head of the U.S. Bishops Conference was an important signal. In 2001, the American bishops elected someone they respected regardless of his race, and the same thing could happen with the election of a Pope.”

Can anyone from Atlanta chime in on this? Does Archbishop Gregory support Obama?

Bishop Gregory is from the Chicago arch-diocese which also gives us Michael Pfleger. I refuse to call him Father.

 

[dawgfan]

Bishop Gregory is from the Chicago arch-diocese which also gives us Michael Pfleger. I refuse to call him Father.

You are basing your comparison of two people based on…location?

 

[Gaurdian]

From the Bishop’s letter on 10/30:

“We will continue to challenge and urge all of our elected officials to enact laws that respect human life at each stage of its existence. These are not principles that we promote only during the election season but every day in season and out of season. Our social teaching is not a platform that can be adjusted to fit the mood of the moment or the sentiments of the day. Far longer than the Declaration of Independence, the Catholic Church has placed life first among those rights that are therein described as inalienable—no matter what some people may have recently suggested regarding the Church’s teaching on human life. We will also speak up for the other concerns that cannot be ignored or dismissed because they flow from the very human dignity that we all enjoy as God’s children.”

I almost hope he comments on any errors from the publicity on this.

 

[dawgfan]

Not surprisingly, Bishop Gregory was among the 200 or so American bishops who remained SILENT on the issue of abortion as the election approached.

silent?

I don’t think there was ever any doubt within the archdiocese what the Archbishops views were. If that weren’t enough his last letter in the archdiocian newsletter before the election date specifically addressed abortion and the election in case someone somewhere somehow missed any prior message.

 

[NReily]

I think this was a “safe” statement for him to make, as people have been wondering we the Church will break the “race barrier”. The question becomes outside of Cardinal Arzine who has the experience and theological orthodox necessary to get the majority of the votes of the conclave.

 

[jc-servant]

I thought Arinze would have been a great choice during the last election, but I think he would be too old the next time around, assuming he even outlives Pope Benedict, who still appears to be in very good shape for a man his age.

The comments of Archbishop Gregory concern me greatly. I think most people on this forum are aware of the extreme views of our President-Elect on the issue of life. If Church leaders and the laity are supporting such a man, what does that say about the Church in general? It is matters such as this, in fact the life matter in particular, which keep me a “dweller”- unable to cross the threshold and return to the Church.

Please forgive me if my criticism of the Archbishop was out of line. As a non-Catholic, I did not mean to give offense.

I’m not concerned about the Archbishop. If you read the article carefully you can see that the writer is the one giving the story the slant that seems to trouble you. I’m sure if we could have heard exactly what questions elicited the responses given and in what order they were asked it would paint a different picture. Remember that papers are sold and rating go up with a bit of “controversy” tossed in.

There is nothing wrong with acknowledging that this particular selection in our country has some positive aspects to it such as sending a message to the many children around the world that one does not have to be a white male in order to work hard and achieve your dream of holdest the highest office in America. It is also a sign that our country is moving forward in race relations which has been a blemish on our national identity for centuries. It does not mean that the Archbishop endorsed all of the man’s beliefs or any of them. The quotes from him don’t show that at all.

 

[stbruno]

According to the principles of Faithful Citizenship, Catholics must support the just care of the poor, the rights of workers, the dignity of people who immigrate to a new nation, the conservation of the environment; we must assess the very complex economic issues, seek to provide affordable health care for people who do not enjoy that security, and foster the more humane treatment of those who are imprisoned, to list only some of the issues that we now face. However, before and prior to all of those vitally important concerns, Faithful Citizenship places the issue of Life itself. All of those other matters are of immense and lasting significance, yet they remain of no consequence for those who are not granted the first right—the right to be born. For this reason, I want to remind all of you, my brothers and sisters, to remember those famous Jeffersonian words borrowed from Locke—and especially remember the order that he gave them.
On November 5, the social and ethical doctrines of the Catholic Church will be the same as they were on November 3. The dignity of human life will still be the foundational issue that we face in our society and in our world. Whoever is elected will hear the same policies from the Catholic Church that we have promoted not only during this election year but consistently about the sacredness of human life and the issues of social justice that necessarily flow from that leading concern. We will continue to challenge and urge all of our elected officials to enact laws that respect human life at each stage of its existence. These are not principles that we promote only during the election season but every day in season and out of season. Our social teaching is not a platform that can be adjusted to fit the mood of the moment or the sentiments of the day. Far longer than the Declaration of Independence, the Catholic Church has placed life first among those rights that are therein described as inalienable—no matter what some people may have recently suggested regarding the Church’s teaching on human life. We will also speak up for the other concerns that cannot be ignored or dismissed because they flow from the very human dignity that we all enjoy as God’s children.

These are Bishop Wilton Gregory’s own words from the Georgia Bulletin, Atlanta’s Catholic paper. I think he certainly promotes the Catholic tenets of protection of life.
georgiabulletin.org/local/2008/10/30/seenandheard/

 

[jc-servant]

Calling it “a great step for humanity” goes a lot beyond just congratulating him. I stand by my statement.

It is a “great step” to show that Americans are able to look at things other than just the color of the candidate’s skin given our negative history regarding race in this country. This is a truth regardless of what one might think about the person’s potential policies.

It was a “great step” when Americans elected Kennedy given the negative history regarding treatment of Catholics in this country. It didn’t mean that everyone supported his adultery or other negative things in his life.

Acknowledging that there might be some positive things to come out of a situation in no way implies that the Archbishop shares the beliefs of the man or of his party. It shows that Archbishop Gregory is a gracious and polite man who is capable of finding something good in a sea of negativity.

If you would take the time to read his writings and do some research on him, you would see that this article and the way it was put together is providing a slanted picture of who the Archbishop is. It is not hard for a writer to piece together quotes from an interview to give a story almost any slant that they think will sell papers/magazines. It is the reason that many public figures tape all of their interviews for their own protection.

 

[cathgal]

Not surprisingly, Bishop Gregory was among the 200 or so American bishops who remained SILENT on the issue of abortion as the election approached. And now he seems to think that the election of a pope takes its cue from the whims of the American electorate.

I seen him on US Catholic Conference. Had no idea if he’s a good or bad bishop.
Now knowing that he made such a stupid remark about election of Obama, he’s not the man of God. He had put the color of his skin above all else, even God.

 

[jc-servant]

I seen him on US Catholic Conference. Had no idea if he’s a good or bad bishop.
Now knowing that he made such a stupid remark about election of Obama, he’s not the man of God. He had put the color of his skin above all else, even God.

So now YOU know the heart of this priest based on one article? How does this relate to the color of the Archbishop’s skin unless you assume that he could not possibly have said the same thing if he were white? How biased does that make you in your thoughts on race? Would you consider yourself not a woman of God because you spout uncharitable statements about one of the men whom He has called to holy orders?

 

[cathgal]

There is nothing wrong with acknowledging that this particular selection in our country has some positive aspects to it such as sending a message to the many children around the world that one does not have to be a white male in order to work hard and achieve your dream of holdest the highest office in America. It is also a sign that our country is moving forward in race relations which has been a blemish on our national identity for centuries. It does not mean that the Archbishop endorsed all of the man’s beliefs or any of them. The quotes from him don’t show that at all.

The quotes show that he puts the color of his skin above all else. He remains silent on abortion, but now, he is so loud about praising the election of a black man!
“A great step for humanity, a sign that in the United States the issue of race and the problem of discrimination have been overcome”
“‘If Obama at the White House is like the first man on the moon, the same thing can certainly happen for the throne of Peter,”

Why does it sounds like he craves power for a black man. Is that all that matters to him. Is he so blind of what the election of Obama could mean for the unborn ??

He’s just another black man who wants a black man to win, regardless

 

[cathgal]

So now YOU know the heart of this priest based on one article? How does this relate to the color of the Archbishop’s skin unless you assume that he could not possibly have said the same thing if he were white? How biased does that make you in your thoughts on race? Would you consider yourself not a woman of God because you spout uncharitable statements about one of the men whom He has called to holy orders?

I saying nothing about his heart. But I know, by his ACTION, that he cares more for the color of his skin than the unborn.

Can you deny it ?

The smart thing for him to do is to remain silent just as he was silent on abortion.

If he’s good, he would think what the Obama victory would mean for the unborn, not about the color of his skin, and that was the first thing that comes out of his mouth.

Just cuz he was called to holy orders doesn’t mean I can’t criticized him for his stupid remarks.

 

[cathgal]

According to the principles of Faithful Citizenship, Catholics must support the just care of the poor, the rights of workers, the dignity of people who immigrate to a new nation, the conservation of the environment; we must assess the very complex economic issues, seek to provide affordable health care for people who do not enjoy that security, and foster the more humane treatment of those who are imprisoned, to list only some of the issues that we now face. However, before and prior to all of those vitally important concerns, Faithful Citizenship places the issue of Life itself. All of those other matters are of immense and lasting significance, yet they remain of no consequence for those who are not granted the first right—the right to be born. For this reason, I want to remind all of you, my brothers and sisters, to remember those famous Jeffersonian words borrowed from Locke—and especially remember the order that he gave them.
On November 5, the social and ethical doctrines of the Catholic Church will be the same as they were on November 3. The dignity of human life will still be the foundational issue that we face in our society and in our world. Whoever is elected will hear the same policies from the Catholic Church that we have promoted not only during this election year but consistently about the sacredness of human life and the issues of social justice that necessarily flow from that leading concern. We will continue to challenge and urge all of our elected officials to enact laws that respect human life at each stage of its existence. These are not principles that we promote only during the election season but every day in season and out of season. Our social teaching is not a platform that can be adjusted to fit the mood of the moment or the sentiments of the day. Far longer than the Declaration of Independence, the Catholic Church has placed life first among those rights that are therein described as inalienable—no matter what some people may have recently suggested regarding the Church’s teaching on human life. We will also speak up for the other concerns that cannot be ignored or dismissed because they flow from the very human dignity that we all enjoy as God’s children.

These are Bishop Wilton Gregory’s own words from the Georgia Bulletin, Atlanta’s Catholic paper. I think he certainly promotes the Catholic tenets of protection of life.
georgiabulletin.org/local/2008/10/30/seenandheard/

Good but not great. Unfortunately, his praising of Obama victory was much louder than this.

 

[cathgal]

Calling it “a great step for humanity” goes a lot beyond just congratulating him. I stand by my statement.

The question is, what group of humanity. Apparently, the bishop has forgotten that group.

 

[cathgal]

silent?

I don’t think there was ever any doubt within the archdiocese what the Archbishops views were. If that weren’t enough his last letter in the archdiocian newsletter .

Was the praising of Obama victory in the archdiocese newsletter?