Habemus Papam

Originally posted by no1marauder
Since he's been the favorite all along, I don't know why it would be a surprise. I'd call it a "W" for Ivanhoe's side; Ratzinger is an arch-conservative willing to run the Church into oblivion in the Western world by taking political positions unsupported by Jesus' teachings. He has been a firm believer in denying Communion to pro-choice RC ...[text shortened]... I'm sure this will pack 'em in the pews and start a flood of young people into the seminaries!

I don't know about 'arch conservative.' I mean, of the reasonable
candidates, Benedict the XVI certainly leaned conservative, but there
were four or five more who made him look progressive.

Given that Ratzinger's early theological writings were moderate, but
turned conservative, I'm holding out some hope that, like Darth Vader,
he will 'feel the conflict within himself,' or some such thing.

You make a good point that it has to be an imperative that he deal
with the ordination crisis.

Nemesio

Originally posted by Nemesio
I don't know about 'arch conservative.' I mean, of the reasonable
candidates, Benedict the XVI certainly leaned conservative, but there
were four or five more who made him look progressive.

Given that Ratzinger's early theological writings were moderate, but
turned conservative, I'm holding out some hope that, like Darth Vader,
he will 'feel th ...[text shortened]... good point that it has to be an imperative that he deal
with the ordination crisis.

Nemesio

The Nigerian Cardinal might have leaned even further to the arch-conservative side, but naming a black man as the Pope would have been an incredibly historic moment.

I notice that they didn't even bother to list any Americans as possible popes. Poor us. :-)

I have great respect for people who are religious, and I respect all religions.
Having said that, I have some real problems with some of the dogma of the Catholic church.
The whole idea of women being denied the chance to be priests is wrong.
The idea of having as many children without the use of any birth control is wrong.

Originally posted by elvendreamgirl
I notice that they didn't even bother to list any Americans as possible popes. Poor us. :-)

I have great respect for people who are religious, and I respect all religions.
Having said that, I have some real problems with some of the dogma of the Catholic church.
The whole idea of women being denied the chance to be priests is wrong.
The idea of having as many children without the use of any birth control is wrong.

You want an American Pope in these times? No, we have too much power and influence now. We don't need a Pope from the USA.

Originally posted by Nemesio
I don't know about 'arch conservative.' I mean, of the reasonable
candidates, Benedict the XVI certainly leaned conservative, but there
were four or five more who made him look progressive.

Given that Ratzinger's early theological writings were moderate, but
turned conservative, I'm holding out some hope that, like Darth Vader,
he will 'feel th ...[text shortened]... good point that it has to be an imperative that he deal
with the ordination crisis.

Nemesio

From what I know of Ratzinger, Darth Vader seems a pretty fitting image.

Originally posted by ivanhoe

This is a very surprising choice. I never thought he would be elected. I considered him to be a too controversial candidate. Now he has to prove he can be a bridgebuilder between all the factions within the RCC and he has to prove he can reach out to the other world-religions.

May God bless Pope Benedict XVI.

Well put.

I think his choice of papal name - Benedict XVI - indicates his desire to be a bridge-builder. Apparently he's quite affable in person.

God bless Pope Benedict XVI!

Originally posted by Coletti
Yep. It's confirmed.

According to CNN it was anybody's race up through the evening gown competition. It was his moving rendition of Purple Rain that secured Ratzinger victory.

He was an AA gunner in WWII for the Wehrmacht. (Conscripted, not a Nazi)
Looks like more of the same, only more so ...

Originally posted by elvendreamgirl
I notice that they didn't even bother to list any Americans as possible popes. Poor us. :-)

I have great respect for people who are religious, and I respect all religions.
Having said that, I have some real problems with some of the dogma of the Catholic church.
The whole idea of women being denied the chance to be priests is wrong.
The idea of having as many children without the use of any birth control is wrong.

With respect, as I see you are a fellow Celt, Queen B., I feel you are focussing on the wrong issues. I think our friend got it quite right to say the Church judges these questions in centuries, and not minutes. If the whole world thinks having numerous sexual parteners is a good idea since 1963, then it doesn't necessarily mean that a 2000-year old institution should change its mind in a flash. The ordination of women happened in certain protestant churches five seconds ago, and has never been the case in all the Church's history. Is it a good idea that men and women do exactly the same things? Of course the sexes are equal, but we are also different, with different roles in life and in society. But that's just the "women issue".

Re: Contraception- one cannot take one piece of the teachings, and not another. The Church does not teach "Go forth and shag un-sheathed", but rather that sexual intercourse should be reserved for marriage. If the Church's teachings were followed in their entirity, then AIDS would not be an issue, so I feel that is a rather unfair criticism. As far as the pill goes, when the Church came out against the pill originally, against the contemporary advice, it was seen as a bad idea. Jump to 2005, and one notes the sexual act has been successfully separated from love and marriage, and that society as a whole is in decline. So who was right? Well, maybe skip forward another 100 years and then we'll see how things have gone. There was a good article on this in the paper here recently, which said it alot better that I might.

Anyway, I would say that people can be quite short-sighted generally, focussing in on relatively unimportant issues such as contraception and homosexuality. Whatever one thinks of those, JPII truly looked outside of the role which was given him, and brought the Church closer with the other two monotheistic religions, something which in this day and age is rather important, not to mention the opening of relations with the Orthodox Church, which had been poor since 1053. Now THAT is the important stuff.

VIVA IL PAPA!!!

Originally posted by Coletti
No - German

Does he speak Romans?

ES

Originally posted by sjeg
Re: Contraception- one cannot take one piece of the teachings, and not another. The Church does not teach "Go forth and shag un-sheathed", but rather that sexual intercourse should be reserved for marriage. If the Church's teachings were followed in their entirity, then AIDS would not be an issue, so I feel that is a rather unfair criticism. As far as the pi ...[text shortened]... e was a good article on this in the paper here recently, which said it alot better that I might.

No one is talking about 'Going forth and shagging unsheated,'
Sjeg. A inflexible ban on birth control can conceivable diminish
the physical intimacy between husband and wife.

The so-called 'Natural Method' is a lie, for it requires copulation
during the periods of time when the women is not fertile. These
fertile times coincide with the times when she is most hormonally
interested in sex; that is, the Church is suggesting that the couple
who does not want to have children avoid sex at the very times
when the woman is most interested in it. This is most unnatural
indeed.

So, for various professional, personal, financial reasons, the couple
(for whom non-coital options do not exist, for oral sex and digital
stimulation are similarly forbidden), will abstain from engaging in
the act which most cosummates their marriage.

The reason the Church spoke out against the pill was because they
had (in the 1930s, I believe) already condemned 'artificial
contraception' in doctrinal form. The committee formed by Pope Paul
VI, comprising 64 lay members and 15 clegry overwhelmingly
voted in favor of contraception (60 to 4 and 9 to 6, respectively).
Karol Wotilja (later to become Pope John Paul II) wrote that acting
in favor with the committee would necessarily call into question
all Church teachings, for it would require them to acknowledge that a
previously 'infallibile' teaching was in error. It was for this reason --
for not giving people the reason to doubt the 'infallibility' of Church
proclamations -- that Pope Paul VI remained opposed to birth control.
It was in no small part a political issue.

As for your claim that the 'sexual act' has been successfully separated
from love and marriage, please keep in mind that 'marrying for love'
is a relatively recent phenomenon in history. 200 years ago, most
people married for convenience and heirs. And, that the 'sexual act'
is any more separated from marriage than it was in the past is pure
speculation; affairs have happened since the inception of monogamy,
sex outside of marriage is no more a part of culture now than 50,
100, or 1000 years ago.

Nemesio

Originally posted by Phlabibit
Does he speak Romans?

ES

Do you mean Italian? Yes, he does.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
You want an American Pope in these times? No, we have too much power and influence now. We don't need a Pope from the USA.

WE COULD RULE THE WORLD!!! 😵

BWAHH HAH HAHH!

...

Oh yeah, we already do. 😏

Don't want to be so obvious about it. 😉

Originally posted by Nemesio
The so-called 'Natural Method' is a lie, for it requires copulation
during the periods of time when the women is not fertile. These
fertile times coincide with the times when she is most hormonally
interested in sex; that is, the Church is suggesting that the couple
who does not want to have children avoid sex at the very times
when the woman is most interested in it. This is most unnatural
indeed.

Supporting evidence?

Originally posted by Nemesio
Do you mean Italian? Yes, he does.

Did you miss my RHBill joke? Ask Dr.Scribs...

ES