BEAUTIFUL!
I hate the discussion taking the focus off of the individual and discussing what color his skin or where he comes form. I think “identity politics” has been a DISASTER in this country and I hope it does not impact the Church.
Lisa
Yeah, I too am pretty peeved about the race card being played by the secular media. This should not be a factor for consideration. The best man for the job should be the prevailing motive. A heavyweight theologian is not the ‘be all and end all’ in my opinion.
I think a strong communicator is clearly called for, but equally important, someone with strong hands on experience as an administrator, (Think Paul VI contrasted to John XXIII) to implement any reforms in the Vatican he deems necessary, to tighten up the Churches procedures and policies.
In light of all the scandals, (eg abuse and banking)accountability and transparency both internationally and nationally are called for. Benedict XVI was clearly trying to make inroads, in my opinion, but was frustrated by power politics in the Vatican and national bishops conferences. The fact that he had to step in and write an open letter to Irish Catholics, in my opinion showed his dismay (reading between the lines) of the lacklustre response of the Irish episcopate to this issue.
I don’t think doctrinal issues will be the major concern, nothing should change there, but how Church affairs are managed, and how they are presented and related to the secular world is becoming more important.
For that reason I would opt for a strong administrator capable of implementing much needed bureaucratic reform, who can transmit clearly stated church teaching to the world.
A tad unseemly to be giving interviews, IMO.
Unfortunate ito say the least.
Personally, my only problem with Cardinal Peter Turkson succeeding would be the conspiracy theories shouting “Malachy’s prophecy! Malachy’s prophecy! Petrus Romanus!” I don’t want to hear about that hogwash anymore; it’s tiring.
It’s nothing against the Cardinal himself, of course.
I think they will be around regardless of who will be the next pope. If his name is not Peter and he’s neither from Rome, nor a resident of Rome, someone will eventually find “clues” anyway. An ancestor of him whose name was Peter, an important trip to Rome made by him or his mother, any other city whose name or importance could be linked to Rome (for ex. Constantinople = “New Rome”), wordplays about Peter = stone, anagrams, numerologic analysis of names etc. - ad infinitum. That’s how conspiracy theories work.
Yeah, just to annoy the conspiracy/prophecy theorists. But like you say, they would still find a way of making it fit in any case.
That article headline is unfortunate for Cardinal Turkson. Reportedly, cardinals who are seen as openly campaigning to become pope are looked down upon, and their prospects are hurt by such tactics. I am afraid that Cardinal Turkson may be viewed in this light.
May have just shot himself in the foot.
It is fun to speculate, but the fact of the matter is that the Holy Spirit will decide who the next Pope is going to be. The next Pope might not even be a Cardinal. I am reminded of Pope Celestine V (who also resigned of his own free will), who was not even a Cardinal but rather a hermit and yet was chosen by the Holy Spirit to lead the Church.
In the spirit of this rare event in the Church, I am going to go out on a limb with my prediction:
View attachment 16176
Dom Louis-Marie, Abbot of Sainte Madeleine du Barroux.
I would be highly amused, imagine how off guard the worlds media would be caught if a literal outsider from the College of Cardinals was elected.
( I’m sure the Pope must have had a little chuckle to himself, at least I hope so, with his ‘little’ announcement on Monday. (The ‘caretaker’ continues to confound and surprise us all, not least the media.)
I really don’t think it likely, but would be in favour of the net being cast wider than it traditionally has been. One could only speculate how many of the Cardinals would give this any serious consideration though.
