Papal candidates - Short List?

[mburn16]

The next Pope needs to be both a strong administrator, and a good communicator. And, while I understand why some people want a third-world Cardinal to get the spot, I don’t think this would help where the Church needs to regain footing the most - Anglo North America and Europe.

I’m afraid a third-world Pope might only exacerbate the thought among many in those areas that “religion is for the poor/uneducated/primitive/etc”.

Oulette, Dolan, etc. - someone capable of making a forceful case for the relevance of faith in western, liberal, modern society. Someone not afraid to march down the aisle and drag wayward parishioners back by the ear.

 

[LisaA]

The next Pope needs to be both a strong administrator, and a good communicator. And, while I understand why some people want a third-world Cardinal to get the spot, I don’t think this would help where the Church needs to regain footing the most - Anglo North America and Europe.

I’m afraid a third-world Pope might only exacerbate the thought among many in those areas that “religion is for the poor/uneducated/primitive/etc”.

Oulette, Dolan, etc. - someone capable of making a forceful case for the relevance of faith in western, liberal, modern society. Someone not afraid to march down the aisle and drag wayward parishioners back by the ear.

Thanks for saying what I’ve been thinking all along. I think the “novelty” impact of a 3rd World Pope would wear off soon. Further this is a western religion and just as I don’t think the Dalai Lama could be replaced by an American no matter how dedicated he was to the practice of Buddhism, I think someone from a country that does not understand western values and thought and structure will alienate the very people that need to be led back into the Church.

Perhaps not the most politically correct attitude but I am hoping for one of the Italians or a North American Pope.

Lisa

 

[Vouthon]

Thanks for saying what I’ve been thinking all along. I think the “novelty” impact of a 3rd World Pope would wear off soon. Further **this is a western religion **and just as I don’t think the Dalai Lama could be replaced by an American no matter how dedicated he was to the practice of Buddhism, I think someone from a country that does not understand western values and thought and structure will alienate the very people that need to be led back into the Church.

Perhaps not the most politically correct attitude but I am hoping for one of the Italians or a North American Pope.

Lisa

Christianity is not a western religion It is the universal religion of Christ founded in the east, in Judea (modern Israel-Palestine) and it is the most widespread faith on earth. St. Peter, whom the popes succeed, was of course a Galilean Jew. We’ve had African popes in the first millenium.

Our religion was born in a cosmopolitan Roman Empire which spread from Great Britain, to continental Europe, the Middle East and Africa etc.

I actually think that the origins of the pope are not important. I don’t particularly care whether he is Italian, American, Austrian, Fillipino, Iraqi or whatever.

I simply seek a man capable of the office. And IMHO Tagle definetly is, what with his boundless charisma, warmth, humility, social media skills, intellect and so on. He would be popular with youth worldwide. A Third World pope, if he has the skills such as Tagle, would be capable of all the things that you and the previous poster outlined. I like Tagle because of Tagle not because he’s from the Third World.

I also love Ravasi, an Italian. He is likewise IMHO fully up to the task and would make a renowned spiritual leader. He also has that friendly charm about him that I think would go down well with the press.

I object to the term “western religion”, however, with all due respect. Christ is not of the east or the west, he is the Lord and Saviour of all men.

 

[LisaA]

Christianity is not a western religion It is the universal religion of Christ founded in the east, in Judea (modern Israel-Palestine) and it is the most widespread faith on earth. St. Peter, whom the popes succeed, was of course a Galilean Jew. We’ve had African popes in the first millenium.

Our religion was born in a cosmopolitan Roman Empire which spread from Great Britain, to Europe, to Africa etc.

I actually think that the origins of the pope are not important. I don’t particularly care whether he is Italian, American, Austrian, Fillipino or whatever.

I simply seek a man capable of the office. And IMHO Tagle definetly is. He would be popular with you worldwide. A Third World pope, if he has the skills such as Tagle, would be capable of all the things that you and the previous poster outlined.

I also love Ravasi, an Italian. He is likewise IMHO fully up to the task.

It absolutely IS western in philosophy. Compare the “western” to the “eastern” and maybe you will understand what I mean. Western Civ from the Greek tradition is far different than what arose in China or India…although I do like many of the tenents of Confucious.

That being said, I agree, geography need not be destiny and I want the BEST MAN FOR THIS MONUMENTAL ASSIGNMENT. But what I see is a lot of (outside admittedly) pressure to name someone from Africa because of the growth in the Church there or your man Tagle because well he’s young and communicates well and the Phillipines is a very Catholic country (although the Evangelicals are making serious inroads).

After Elizabeth502 mentioned Ravasi I looked up various bios and agree he is absolutely up to the task. Of course I am partial to Cardinal Timothy Dolan as I’ve followed him for some time in his books and radio addresses as well as his work as the head of the Bishops. But of course my fondness for Cardinal Dolan is irrelevant…just weighing in here!

Lisa

 

[Brendan_64]

An American Pope would not be of particular appeal to Europeans at all.

I don’t intend to cause any offence, but the Catholic Church in America is viewed by a lot of Europeans as being ‘a law unto itself’ and in many ways not particularly representative of the universal Church. A bit too experimental with the Liturgy, rogue nuns and priests spouting off ‘modernist’ views, tolerance of Freemasons amongst some clergy etc. Then there is all the baggage that goes with the view of the USA as self-serving and colonial by much of the rest of the world.

Nothing against Cardinal Dolan, but an American Pope would not be seen as a particularly unifying force amongst Catholics worldwide.

Rather than think about which Pope is best for our own particular geographical region we should be wishing for a Pope to unite all Catholics worldwide. Perhaps an Italian Pope to pull everything back towards the centre and impose a much needed discipline regarding practices and viewpoints?

Christianity is not a western religion It is the universal religion of Christ founded in the east, in Judea (modern Israel-Palestine) and it is the most widespread faith on earth.

I think the “novelty” impact of a 3rd World Pope would wear off soon.

How would it be a ‘novelty’? There are more Catholics in the 3rd World than there are in the West.

 

[LisaA]

An American Pope would not be of particular appeal to Europeans at all.

I don’t intend to cause any offence, but the Catholic Church in America is viewed by a lot of Europeans as being ‘a law unto itself’ and in many ways not particularly representative of the universal Church. A bit too experimental with the Liturgy, rogue nuns and priests spouting off ‘modernist’ views, tolerance of Freemasons amongst some clergy etc. Then there is all the baggage that goes with the view of the USA as self-serving and colonial by much of the rest of the world.

Nothing against Cardinal Dolan, but an American Pope would not be seen as a particularly unifying force amongst Catholics worldwide.

Rather than think about which Pope is best for our own particular geographical region we should be wishing for a Pope to unite all Catholics worldwide.

Hopefully you read my post where I said “I” was fond of him but understood my opinion is irrelevent.

My hope and belief is that the right man for such a time as this will be chosen by the Cardinals directed by the Holy Spirit. I am praying daily for this to happen.

Lisa

 

[mburn16]

Oh I’m sure there would be some issues. But of course, the European church (in fact, the European continent) doesn’t get much respect from this side of the Atlantic either. Where European Catholics see rouge Americans still caught in the 1960s, having to do everything their own way, Americans look at Europe and see empty churches and a complete inability to reverse cultural decline.

While I very much want a Pope fluent (and persuasive) in English, and would dearly love an American (or, if I have to settle for it), a Canadian…this isn’t why I think Oulette or Dolan would be good choices. I think its much more likely that these men (or some of the others) would be strong administrators, with the ability to bring a leaf blower into the Curia, as well as a much stronger ability to manage the media relations side.

Some people will find it undignified, but if we are to win the battle against secularism…I think we need a Pope as comfortable on CNN as in the Sistine Chapel.

 

[mburn16]

How would it be a ‘novelty’? There are more Catholics in the 3rd World than there are in the West.

Not exactly a strong pro-3rd world Pope argument. You don’t patch your boat where it isn’t leaking.

 

[Vouthon]

It absolutely IS western in philosophy. Compare the “western” to the “eastern” and maybe you will understand what I mean. Western Civ from the Greek tradition is far different than what arose in China or India…although I do like many of the tenents of Confucious.

That being said, I agree, geography need not be destiny and I want the BEST MAN FOR THIS MONUMENTAL ASSIGNMENT. But what I see is a lot of (outside admittedly) pressure to name someone from Africa because of the growth in the Church there or man Tagle because well he’s young and communicates well and the Phillipines is a very Catholic country (although the Evangelicals are making serious inroads).

After Elizabeth502 mentioned Ravasi I looked up various bios and agree he is absolutely up to the task.

Lisa

Dear Lisa,

I am aware of the Greek (platonic and aristotelian) philosophy of which our Fathers in Faith and the scholastics utilized, however this was a medium used through which to interpret what was undoubtedly an eastern, Hebraic tradition originally. Christianity has inculturated itself in various cultures throughout the world. Greek philosophy is not superior to Chinese, or Indian. They are all non-Christian, which can be (and in the case of Greek has been) utilized by Christians.

The view of the Church Fathers, actually, was that Christianity was the true philosophy underlying every world philosophy:

“…Thus philosophy, a thing of the highest utility, flourished in antiquity among the barbarians, shedding its light over the nations. And afterwards it came to Greece. First in its ranks were the prophets of the Egyptians; and the Chaldeans among the Assyrians; and the Druids among the Gauls; and the Sramanas among the Bactrians; and the philosophers of the Celts; and the Magi of the Persians, who foretold the Saviour’s birth, and came into the land of Judaea guided by a star. The Indian gymnosophists are also in the number, and the other barbarian philosophers. And of these there are two classes, some of them called Sramanas, and others Brahmins…”

- Saint Clement of Alexandria (c. 150 - c. 220), Early Catholic Church father

Hence why Blessed Pope John Paul II once said in an encyclical:

“…My thoughts turn immediately to the lands of the East, so rich in religious and philosophical traditions of great antiquity. Among these lands, India has a special place. A great spiritual impulse leads Indian thought to seek an experience which would liberate the spirit from the shackles of time and space and would therefore acquire absolute value. The dynamic of this quest for liberation provides the context for great metaphysical systems. In India particularly, it is the duty of Christians now to draw from this rich heritage the elements compatible with their faith, in order to enrich Christian thought…”

***- Blessed Pope John Paul II, FIDES ET RATIO, 1998 ***

The Eastern philosophy you refer to is not uniquely “Eastern”. It is Indian-oriental philisophy of the Vedanta school and in the Orient Confucian-Taoist. The Middle East is where the Abrahamic religions of Judaism, Christianity and Islam arose and they too are “Eastern”. These are not “Western” religions and they didn’t originally, any of them, embrace Hellenism.

In origin there were all semitic.

Jesus never came preaching Western philosophy. He came to fulfil the Jewish Tanakh and the hopes of all men. Consider the feast of Pentecost. It is the universal church, not the western church.

Please, lets not yoke our religion solely with the West. It is so much more than the ‘West’.

 

[LisaA]

How would it be a ‘novelty’? There are more Catholics in the 3rd World than there are in the West.

Uh…how many African popes have been named? Asian Popes?

Ergo, this would be a novelty.

Again the point I have made repeatedly is that identity politics is the WORST way to choose a leader. That’s how we got Obama after all Thus I believe that the Cardinals will not make their choice based on skin color, continent of origin, growth or lack thereof in the Cardinal’s homeland but whether or not he is the right man for the time, someone who can deal with the Church as it is, was and will be but is as one poster said, “as comfortable on CNN as in the Sistine Chapel.”

 

[livnlern]

I can’t help but think that another Italian pope is not what is needed. The Catholic Church is a worldwide church. I don’t have anything against Italians and of course the Vatican is in Italy, but John Paul II was a breath of fresh air after so many Italian popes. Of course the Holy Spirit will decide who is best and I pray for that result, no matter who is chosen. But I’m hoping for someone who isn’t Italian.

 

[Brendan_64]

And where there are more people there is more opportunity to win people over, and more opportunity to grow the Church.

You don’t choose your Pope primarily on the basis that he will be able to help sort out the issues of one nation consisting of a small percentage of Catholics in the universal Church. By doing so you are saying that the state of the Church in the USA is THE most pressing issues for the universal Church. So much so that we should choose our next Pope on that basis.

I think we need a Pope to unify the Church and enforce a much needed ‘conservative’ discipline worldwide. We are a universal Church, what we do in one church should be same as what we do in another (OF and EF accepted of course) regardless of where we are in the world. The response our clergy give on doctrinal and moral issues such be the same the world over. A unifying Pope to tighten things up worldwide is what I think we need.

We don’t need a Pope appointed with an aim to sort out the issues of one particular nation, we need a Pope to bring us together as a united worldwide force against Evil.

 

[LisaA]

Dear Lisa,

I am aware of the Greek (platonic and aristotelian) philosophy of which our Fathers in Faith and the scholastics utilized, however this was a medium used through which to interpret what was undoubtedly an eastern, Hebraic tradition originally. Christianity has inculturated itself in various cultures throughout the world. Greek philosophy is not superior to Chinese, or Indian. They are all non-Christian, which can be (and in the case of Greek has been) utilized by Christians.

The view of the Church Fathers, actually, was that Christianity was the true philosophy underlying every world philosophy:

Hence why Blessed Pope John Paul II once said in an encyclical:

The Eastern philosophy you refer to is not uniquely “Eastern”. It is Indian-oriental philisophy of the Vedanta school and in the Orient Confucian-Taoist. The Middle East is where the Abrahamic religions of Judaism, Christianity and Islam arose and they too are “Eastern”. These are not “Western” religions and they didn’t originally, any of them, embrace Hellenism.

In origin there were all semitic.

Jesus never came preaching Western philosophy. He came to fulfil the Jewish Tanakh and the hopes of all men. Consider the feast of Pentecost. It is the universal church, not the western church.

Please, lets not yoke our religion solely with the West. It is so much more than the ‘West’.

Right…just say a few more ommmms, take a yoga class and suddenly east meets west. Again, the tenents, practices, God vs gods, are very different even if we both use insense. I suspect we would find a lot more Greek philosophy than the Vedas in Church doctrine regardless of “appreciating” some of the positive values of other faith traditions.

So what’s your point? Oh and the strawmane you knocked over wasn’t set up by me.

For about the tenth time, I hope, pray and believe that the Cardinals will NOT be influenced by identity poltitics and that the best man will be named Pope without regard to skin color or country of origin.

Lisa

 

[mburn16]

We don’t need a Pope appointed with an aim to sort out the issues of one particular nation, we need a Pope to bring us together as a united worldwide force against Evil.

While I agree with this, I think the problems of the church are primarily in the developed world. Despite a long line of (generally old) white European men, the church in Africa, and Asia, and South America has exploded. Meanwhile, the Church in Europe has faltered, and the Church in the USA is borderline (on top of all the scandals).

Its not about getting one particular nation’s church in order, its about asking “where do we need to fix things?”…and picking someone with the appropriate skill, and appeal, and understanding to do so.

 

[Vouthon]

Right…just say a few more ommmms, take a yoga class and suddenly east meets west. Again, the tenents, practices, God vs gods, are very different even if we both use insense. I suspect we would find a lot more Greek philosophy than the Vedas in Church doctrine regardless of “appreciating” some of the positive values of other faith traditions.

So what’s your point? Oh and the strawmane you knocked over wasn’t set up by me.

For about the tenth time, I hope, pray and believe that the Cardinals will NOT be influenced by identity poltitics and that the best man will be named Pope without regard to skin color or country of origin.

Lisa

Indian philosophy, as Blessed Pope John Paul II recognised (and many Western Christians do not), is much more than “ooms”, manthras, idols and what-not. I am not speaking of practices of other religions such as Yoga (which, to most Westerners, is simply breathing and stretching exercises rather than linked directly to its origins in Vedanta).

That is the devotional aspects of the Hindu, or other, religion(s) to be compared with the pantheon of deities worshipped by Rome and Greece, the animal sacrifices etc. The church never embraced that.

The philosophy of the Upanishads, for example, should be distinguished from this. Like with Neoplatonism, which was utilized by the church, it has tendencies in the Non-dualistic school to extend towards monism (like Plotinus’ monad). However there are dualistic schools of Indian thought that might surprise you, such as the Dvaita school of Shri Madhvacharya (from wikipedia):

Dvaita (Sanskrit: द्वैत) (also known as Bheda-vāda, Tattva-vāda and Bimba-pratibimba-vāda) is **a school of Vedanta founded by Shri Madhvacharya **(c. 1238-1317 CE) who was also known as Purna Prajna and Ananda Tirtha. Dvaita stresses a strict distinction between God— the Supreme-Soul (paramaatma (परमात्मा)) and the individual souls (jiivatma (जीवात्मा))…Like Ramanuja, Madhvacharya also embraced Vaishnava theology which understood God as being personal and endowed with attributes. To Madhvacharya, Brahman of the Vedanta was same as Vishnu…

Because the existence of individuals is grounded in the divine, they are depicted as reflections, images or even shadows of the divine, but never in any way identical with the divine. Liberation therefore is described as the realization that all finite reality is essentially dependent on the Supreme.[2]

Five fundamental, eternal and real differences are described in this system—
Between the individual soul (or jīvatma) and God (Brahmatma īshvara or Vishnu).
Between matter (inanimate, insentient) and God.
Among individual souls (jīvatma)
Between matter and jīva.
Among various types of matter.

These five differences are said to make up the universe. The universe is aptly called “prapancha” for this reason…

Madhva…[adhered to the] concept of eternal damnation. For example, he divides souls into three classes. One class of souls, which qualify for liberation (Mukti-yogyas), another subject to eternal rebirth or eternal transmigration (Nitya-samsarins) and a** third class that is eventually condemned to eternal hell **or andhatamas (Tamo-yogyas).[3].

As with Greek philosophy, which the church detected errors in but utilized what was good, Dvaita is not compatible in every way with our doctrines, however it is many respects - certainly not less so than Artistotelianism or Neoplatonism.

The only reason the church utilized Greek philosophy to such a high degree was not because this pagan philosophy is somehow superior to all other non-Christian philosophies, rather it was because it was expedient to do so in the Roman Empire where Hellenism was the prevalent culture, everywhere in the Empire.

There is nothing particularly “special” about Plato and Aristotle. They are great philosophers, however they are not the be all and end all, neither is pagan Rome or Athens.

I feel that you might have a narrow view of Indian philosophy, associating it solely with such things as Yoga, modern New Age (mis)use of certain Vedantic concepts and Non-Dualism, when it is actually a rich, ancient source of philosophical genius as Pope John Paul II recognised.

 

[Santi2]

I don’t know .

Who is saying they should ?

I thought you did. Having lived through six conclaves, age must be catching up with me, Petronus. Time was when all we got was: “Pope died, now go and pray”.

 

[sw85]

I wish people more consideration would be given to Bagnasco or Piacenza.

 

[LisaA]

Indian philosophy, as Blessed Pope John Paul II recognised (and many Western Christians do not), is much more than “ooms”, manthras, idols and what-not. I am not speaking of practices of other religions such as Yoga (which, to most Westerners, is simply breathing and stretching exercises rather than linked directly to its origins in Vedanta).

That is the devotional aspects of the Hindu, or other, religion(s) to be compared with the pantheon of deities worshipped by Rome and Greece, the animal sacrifices etc. The church never embraced that.

The philosophy of the Upanishads, for example, should be distinguished from this. Like with Neoplatonism, which was utilized by the church, it has tendencies in the Non-dualistic school to extend towards monism (like Plotinus’ monad). However there are dualistic schools of Indian thought that might surprise you, such as the Dvaita school of Shri Madhvacharya (from wikipedia):

As with Greek philosophy, which the church detected errors in but utilized what was good, Dvaita is not compatible in every way with our doctrines, however it is many respects - certainly not less so than Artistotelianism or Neoplatonism.

The only reason the church utilized Greek philosophy to such a high degree was not because this pagan philosophy is somehow superior to all other non-Christian philosophies, rather it was because it was expedient to do so in the Roman Empire where Hellenism was the prevalent culture, everywhere in the Empire.

There is nothing particularly “special” about Plato and Aristotle. They are great philosophers, however they are not the be all and end all, neither is pagan Rome or Athens.

I feel that you might have a narrow view of Indian philosophy, associating it solely with such things as Yoga, modern New Age (mis)use of certain Vedantic concepts and Non-Dualism, when it is actually a rich, ancient source of philosophical genius as Pope John Paul II recognised.

Well we could get into a lengthy argument because I believe western civ is vastly superior with respect to my belief that human life is sacred, to be protected and that we all have human dignity that is from our humanity, not because of our station in life. But again I grew up in western country and these are my values. Growiing up in the eastern tradition, you will not see the dignity of the person, the protection of every human life, the basic equality that is literally bred into us.

As to you assessment that I’m some kind of spandex yogini who spent a few years looking at crystals and thinking about my past lives…well no that would not be the case.

At any rate none of this has anything to do with the choice of Pope. I still maintain there is no inherent benefit in picking a Pope based on his country of birth.

Do you?

Lisa

 

[LisaA]

I wish people more consideration would be given to Bagnasco or Piacenza.

Tell us why. I want to learn as much as I can about our future Holy Father.
Lisa

 

[Tampa_Dave]

While I agree with this, I think the problems of the church are primarily in the developed world. Despite a long line of (generally old) white European men, the church in Africa, and Asia, and South America has exploded. Meanwhile, the Church in Europe has faltered, and the Church in the USA is borderline (on top of all the scandals).

Its not about getting one particular nation’s church in order, its about asking “where do we need to fix things?”…and picking someone with the appropriate skill, and appeal, and understanding to do so.

A pope drawn from a major region where the Church is waning is very appropriate. With all due respect to Africa and Latin America, I believe the next pope should come from Europe or America. But I have faith in the Cardinals and Our Lord, so if Cardinal Turkson, becomes Pope Benedict XVI’s successor, so be it.