The next pope

  • Thread starter Thread starter pro_multis
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Maybe there will be a John Paul III and then a Traditionalist. No one but God really knows.
 
pro_multis said:
I have enjoyed watching the cult of personality surrounding this man diminish over the past 1-2 years.
Click to expand...
Really? You’ve enjoyed It? How odd. I’ve seen no sign that the love Catholics hold for John Paul II has diminished at all.
 
Rites said:
His Excellency, Archbishop (soon to be Cardinal, Deo gratias) Raymond Burke.

I can think of absolutely no one in the current world hierarchy who would make a better pick. Bishop Fellay would also be nice, but that’s hardly a practical option.
Click to expand...
Burke will NEVER be made a cardinal. No way, no how. He’s stepped on too many toes with his petulant little outbursts. The curia doesn’t like that sorta behavior…
 
SunnaB16 said:
Agreed. i probably havent been at CAF long enough to notice the extreme side. i m old enough (shudder!) to remember some aspects of the “pre-Vatican II Church”, and the faith of a lot of people (eg my older sister) seemed to be cold and bloodless. The Church had to have a bomb put under it to clear out a lot of cobwebs and other assorted debris. The fact that so many embraced the later abuses shows that their faith was already skewed.

Some of us dont apprecate what we have until we lose it; so being deprived of the TLM for 4 decades has given me a greater love for it... as well as accepting unconditionally the validity of the Novus Ordo Form. i cant help feeling that Pope Benedict has begun to deliver the true fruits of Vatican II.
Click to expand...
FASCINATING point! People were not rushing to join the Church in order to change it. The big drivers were those ALREADY in power in most cases.

I think JPII did a lot of trail-blazing ant BXVI is now laying a lot of asphalt…
 
At_Trent said:
Hear Hear !
I agree, it is absurd to fathom H.E. Williamson being Cardinal Secretary ! Better he be punished for his antics and handed the mess in L.A. to clean up for penance after M.H. Mahoney retires.

But yea, I guess we could live with H.E. Fellay being pope after the initial culture shock. 😃
Click to expand...
He wouldn’t be up to the task. Nor would Fellay for that matter. Both would tank.
 
Timothysis said:
“OF” means, as defined by Pope Benedict XVI, the “Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite.” Pope Benedict has declared that there are two expressions of the Roman Rite, the Ordinary Form, being Mass according to the Pauline Missal, and the Extraordinary Form, being Mass according to the 1962 edition of the Tridentine Missal. Your attempts to use it as a pejorative reveal more about yourself than the term.
Click to expand...
I agree. The gigs at the OF are sooooo transparent…
 
Timothysis said:
…I never presumed or proposed any such notion. However, the attendance at EFs of the Mass are a very small percentage to the OF. They both have a place in the Church and people have a choice. To try and force a return of the Latin Mass as the OF would produce anarchy as such has never been seen in the Church.
Click to expand...
I don’t think many here realize that fact. I still grin when I see people offering-up the EF as some sort of silver bullet for all the problems the Church faces.
 
ChurchTorch said:
I don’t think many here realize that fact. I still grin when I see people offering-up the EF as some sort of silver bullet for all the problems the Church faces.
Click to expand...
The New Mass was introduced by fiat. Anarchy did not ensue, 'though there were a lot of clergy and religious quitting at that time. The return of the TLM to every parish would be a good start in restoring orthodoxy to the Church and a kindness to those that want it.

Actually, that is an interesting mental exercise.** Would those who favour the current reforms and preach obedience, be obedient themselves** if the next Pope abrogated the Paul VI Mass, assuming he could do so?

Let’s see: clerical scandals, government and media attacks on Christianity, apostasy within the Church, Islam in resurgence etc. What kind of a Pope would we need?

[thinks]

[thinks]

I know, a nice liberal one who’s keen on ecumenism!

[Note: sacrasm]
 
Layman said:
The New Mass was introduced by fiat. Anarchy did not ensue, 'though there were a lot of clergy and religious quitting at that time. The return of the TLM to every parish would be a good start in restoring orthodoxy to the Church and a kindness to those that want it.

Actually, that is an interesting mental exercise.** Would those who favour the current reforms and preach obedience, be obedient themselves** if the next Pope abrogated the Paul VI Mass, assuming he could do so?

Let’s see: clerical scandals, government and media attacks on Christianity, apostasy within the Church, Islam in resurgence etc. What kind of a Pope would we need?

[thinks]

[thinks]

I know, a nice liberal one who’s keen on ecumenism!

[Note: sacrasm]
Click to expand...
I favor the reforms of the Second Vatican Council and I encourage Catholics to be obedient to the faith and the Holy Father. I would continue my obedience to the Church no matter which liturgy the Holy Father, together with his bishops in council, saw fit to make the ordinary form within the Church. As for the next Pope, I’m not sure what the adjective “liberal” means within this context (though I note its perjorative tone), but any Pope in our day and age will be “keen on ecumenism.” A religious leader can hardly be an influence in the world if he refuses to talk with people of different faiths.
 
ChurchTorch said:
Catholics’ toes. He was making too many waves in the USA. That’s bad form. He won’t be a cardinal.
Click to expand...
Oh, I see now. 🙂 Catholic’s toes. Ok, the plan is to move him to Rome where he has no influence. Brilliant !
But seriously , I think you may be misrepresenting H.H. BXVI’s intentions CT. It doesn’t quite make sense.
…Burke left St. Louis to become the prefect, or leader, of the Apostolic Signatura – often described as the Vatican’s version of the Supreme Court. Burke also is a member of two other Vatican offices, the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, which interprets canon law, and the Congregation for the Clergy, which regulates the formation and training of diocesan priests and deacons… interact.stltoday.com/blogzone/civil-religion/catholic/2009/10/archbishop-burke-named-to-another-influential-vatican-post/
Click to expand...
And another
The Canon is completely clear, it is not subject in my judgment to any other interpretations. When someone is publicly and obstinately in grave sin we may not administer Holy Communion to the person. And that, basically, for two reasons: number one, to prevent the person himself or herself from committing a sacrilege, and secondly, to protect the sanctity of the Holy Eucharist. In other words, to approach, to receive our Lord in Holy Communion, when one insists on remaining in grave sin, is such a violation of the sanctity of the Holy Eucharist, so that Communion must not be given to people who are publicly, obstinately, in grave sin.
blog.beliefnet.com/pontifications/2009/03/archbishop-burke-to-terry-deny.html
Click to expand...
He’s been appointed to a fairly high profile and influential position CT. He’s a courageous member of our clergy, just as is the Bishop of Rome. The toes he steps on are those of Apostates.
 
Layman said:
The New Mass was introduced by fiat. Anarchy did not ensue,
Click to expand...
Anarchy did not ensue because the overwhelming majority of people prefer Mass in the vernacular, just as they did when Latin started becoming the language of the western liturgy back in the 300’s. I have yet to meet a priest from that era who was not thrilled to have the Mass in the vernacular, though I’m sure there were a few around, nor have I ever met one who would champion a return even though they are more than happy to see the TLM available for those who prefer it. It seems to be almost exclusively some of the new young priests who never experienced its problems pre-Vatican II who eagerly promote it.

Any belief that there is some kind of groundswell for returning the TLM to being the OF is frankly whistling in the wind. While it most assuredly has its benefits to those who prefer it, the overwhelming majority do not.

As so many of these threads seem to be doing though, this has gone completely off topic so I’l leave it at that since this is another topic that has been more than beaten to death in the many threads discussing it.
 
Young_Thinker said:
Well, for one thing, he was a bit of a progressive and I am a Traditionalist. Perhaps excessive ecunemism, for instance.
Click to expand...
If I remember correctly, many folks on the other end of the progressive / traditionalist spectrum felt that Pope John Paul II was more traditional in his approach. Don’t you remember his public chiding of Ernesto Cardinale during his visit to Nicaraugua or the Vatican’s study of American seminaries in the 80’s? This had a lot of folks on the “progressive” end of the spectrum up in arms and thinking the Holy Father was a reincarnation of Pope Pius XII. I guess you can’t please everyone.
 
Tsuwano said:
If I remember correctly, many folks on the other end of the progressive / traditionalist spectrum felt that Pope John Paul II was more traditional in his approach. Don’t you remember his public chiding of Ernesto Cardinale during his visit to Nicaraugua or the Vatican’s study of American seminaries in the 80’s? This had a lot of folks on the “progressive” end of the spectrum up in arms and thinking the Holy Father was a reincarnation of Pope Pius XII. I guess you can’t please everyone.
Click to expand...
I agree.
 
At_Trent said:
Oh, I see now. 🙂 Catholic’s toes. Ok, the plan is to move him to Rome where he has no influence. Brilliant !
But seriously , I think you may be misrepresenting H.H. BXVI’s intentions CT. It doesn’t quite make sense.

And another

He’s been appointed to a fairly high profile and influential position CT. He’s a courageous member of our clergy, just as is the Bishop of Rome. The toes he steps on are those of Apostates.
Click to expand...
He’s no longer a metro. He’s doing a job that any bishop with a canon law background could do. I doubt he’ll ever be a metro again although I could see him back at a secondary level archdiocese like StL.

A man like Burke would never be put in charge of an LA, NYC or Chicago. He would cause too much dissent with his combative style. He’d tank. Then the Holy See would have to move him again.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top