Skip to comments.WILL INDIAN PONTIFF SUCCEED POPE?
Posted on 03/31/2005 2:41:41 AM PST by Robert Drobot
MUMBAI: As Pope John Paul II remains hospitalised, the names of prelates from Asia, Africa and Latin America, including that of an Indian archbishop, figure in the list of those who are likely to succeed him, a media report said.
Mumbai's archbishop Ivan Diaz, a friend of Mother Teresa, figures in the list, international weekly magazine BusinessWeek said in an article titled Why The Next Pope May Be A Surprise.
When contacted, Diaz' office dismissed the report as 'rubbish' and said the archbishop will not entertain interviews on the matter.
The College of Cardinals will select a Pope when John Paul passes on.
But when the time comes for a conclave to anoint a new pontiff to lead the world's 1.1 billion Catholics, John Paul's influence will still be considerable, the weekly said. He has appointed 115 of the 120 cardinals eligible to elect the next Pope, all with an eye to enforcing his conservative stance on issues like abortion, the role of women in the church, homosexuality, and bioethics, it said.
Would a weaving of non-Roman Catholic practices be acceptable to an Indian bishop elected pope?
But then, non-Roman Catholic pageantry and ritual has already been made part of church services; the content of which purposely mocks Roman Catholic reverence and purpose of Holy Mass.
I thought the rule was the the Pope had to be a white guy from Europe?
"...enforcing his conservative stance on issues like abortion, the role of women in the church, homosexuality, and bioethics, it said."
His "conservative stance" has little to do with it. The final authority is Biblical and is God's. Interesting married priests are left out of that statement since that and only that in the list is actually negotiable.
Feelings trump morality, grace, and even The Commandments.
This is the sort of "spin" news story we need to watch carefully.
I have more than a passing acquaintance with this bishop. Describing him as a "friend of Mother Teresa" is designed to garner support for him and get some traction going. This is a very misleading use of Blessed Mother Teresa's name.
I do not want to express an opinion contrary to the will of the Most Holy Trinity, so if he is the Lord's choice for Pope then I will pray for him. But in good conscience I must pray that he is not elected as Pontiff.
No such rule.
When was the last Pope that wasn't?
The absolute rule is that the pope must be a baptized Catholic male.
This is from a site called "Pope Chart."
- 205 were Italians, (106 Romans)
- 19 Frenchmen
- 14 Greeks
- 8 Syrians
- 5 Germans
- 3 Africans
- 2 Spaniards
- 1 Austrian
- 1 Palestinian
- 1 Englishman
- 1 Dutchman
- 1 Pole
First of all the logic you are using is somewhat flawed. Just because something has not happened does not automatically imply it cannot happen or there is a rule against it happening. All it means is it has not happened, yet. For example there has never been a woman US president, or a minority US prsident. But that doesn't mean there is a law saying here cannot be one. Also before Calvin Coolidge there had never been a Congregationalist US president, and before JFK never a Catholic US president. There has to be a first time for everything. An even more base example is global circumnavigation when people thought the world had an edge where ships would either fall off or be swallowed by drakes and dragons.
Just because something hasn't occured yet doesn't mean there is a rule against it.
My second point deals with the papacy directly. There have been major changes in the last half century, many of them obvious, and a good number having to do with the fact that most Catholics in the world are no longer in Europe. The great Catholic centers today are in South America and Africa in terms of quantity, and South America and Goa, India in terms of density. It is also in this places where the faith is still quite ardently held (no Sunday church tourism but true adherence by the larger part of the congregration). Infact last year there was talk of 'exporting' South American and African priests to the west due to a lack of clergy here.
Anyways, Catholicism is no longer limited to Rome and greater Europe.
However the most important aspect is what has been going on in the Papacy before the current Pope. When Pope Paul VI died in 1978, Karol Wojtyla, the Cardinal Archbishop of Krakow, Poland, became Pope John Paul II. He was the first non-Italian pope in over 400 years to be come pope. That was a huge step in 1978 since it was something that hadn't occured in over 4 centuries (it had occured obviously before then).
Moreover look at the current nominies. The fore-runners are one Brazilian, one African, an Indian, and 2 Italians. IF there was a rule saying 'no non-whites' (which would be immesnely stupid considering over 50% of practicing Catholics are in South America, and a good chunk of the others in Africa and parts of Asia). The next pope is up in the air, because each of the gentlemen above are worthy and each has their own camp of supporters (although bthe Brazilian and the Nigerian seem to be slightly ahead, but that doesn't mean a thing in papal elections. Who knows, an Italian pope might be elected, but that will not be due to some nefarious 'rule').
Anyways, there is no such rule. And just because something has not happened does not mean that it is indicative of a rule against it.
this places = these places.
So if I were to suggest that despite only 2 of 5 contenders being European, they have together a better than 50% chance of one of them being selected as the next Pope, would you think that a misjudgement? I'd like to see what it really turns out to be. Catholicism is not new to either Africa or South America, yet the former continent hasn't supplied a Pope in 1600 years, and the latter has never had one of its members chosen. With regards to the size of Catholic populations, it seems that there is at least a custom of choosing Europeans for that post out of proportion to their numbers.
Yes it was very informative, thanks sitetest.
I think it's probably more likely that the next pope will be white guy from Europe than otherwise.
Just not against the rules otherwise.
And this time around, I think there's a strong (but not as much as 50%) chance that we'll have a non-European.
There is a big chance that the next Pope will be Italian. While many of the Cardinals support the great work that Pope John Paul II did there are a couple (albeit powerful) who feel that he has interfered too much with the authority of the bishops and priests worldwide. It is time, they say, to re-emphasise the pope's role as the Bishop of Rome. Leading candidates from Italy range from the relatively liberal Cardinal Martini, Archbishop of Milan, to the more conservative Secretary of State, Cardinal Sodano, one of the most powerful men in the Vatican.
Hence there is a sizeable chunk that the next pope might be an Italian.
But there is still an enormous possibility that the next Pope will be Nigerian Cardinal, Francis Arinze. He heads interfaith dialogue at the Vatican, an area of increasing importance to the church as it tries to engage with the non-Christian world. Or the Brazilian Cardinal Neve. Or an Indian cardinal (i cannot recall his name right now).
I guess the good thing is that all of these men are more than qualified, and hopefully they will continue with the amazing work that Pope John Paul II did. In my opinion (as well as those of many others) this Pope was just as important as PResident Ronald Reagan in crushing the dastardly head of Communism. And i am not even a Catholic.
I'll join you guys in praying that the best man wins. I'm not a Catholic either, but I consider all Christians to be allies against those who hate God and His works.
I guess I'm the only one here who swears submission to the Roman Pontiff.
Yeah, for me I'm more interested in seeing the positive effects of a strong and righteous Pope, than concerned with who he might be or the specifics of what he might say. One doesn't have to be Catholic to recognize the importance of the Church in pushing back the forces of evil that run rampant in this world.
Well, as a Catholic, I appreciate your prayers, especially to the Holy Spirit.
They're thinking of outsourcing...
Time for an American?
Fox News has just announced - Pope John Paul II has died.
If there were "rules" about ethnicity, the Pope would likely
have been Jewish...... to maintain the tradition
Turns out that the world hates America for it's power and wealth, so the Vatican will never choose an American for such a powerful position. Seems we have "too much power already!"
It is somewhat interesting that of the major leading candidates, none of which can be known with certainty outside of the election committee, many have merited a 'what if' article of their own. The committe could choose anyone. If the candidate is not qualified, any deficiency can be maded up in ten minutes. Just male, Roman Catholic, and single, the basics need to be in place already.
From what I hear, what has distinguished Diaz from other Indian Arhcbishops is his insistenced on liturgical norms. Keep in mind, he is a close friend of Mother Therese, whose sanctity helped generate 85,000 religous vocations in India. Most of the rest of the Indian hierarchy are spiritually descended from the same sort of goody-two-shoes who preached Liberation Theology all across Latin America.
Thanks for the reminder: This is Business Week associating him with Mother Therese.
The Pope is Bishop of Rome, and head of the curia. The Cardinals were originally the chief priests from around Rome. Even though long ago, they were expanded to France, etc., to make the Bishop of Rome more universally representative, for reasons of simple geography, the Cardinals remained essentially a Western-mediterranean enclave: they needed to be able to assemble easily in Rome. The Pope has usually been Italian simply because Italians made up most of the college, and were most familiar to others in the college. Spanish, German and English cardinals, for instance, tended to be more outsiders, or even an opposing faction, like the French.
Since the era of the Roman Empire, nearly all of the Popes have been Italian, including for a stretch of over five centuries. But there have been Spanish, German, French and even an English (Adrian I) Pope.
Since modern transporation has become popular, the portion of Italian electors has fallen from 57% in the 1940s to less than 20%. And with modern communication, the need to get to Rome to be known to Rome is still less. There simply is little reason for the Pope to continue to come from the Western Meditteranean, specifically Italy.
Until the last thirty years, however, the Roman Catholic Church's clergy was predominantly European. Under JP2, Africa, Asia, and yes, Latin America are finally generating their own vocations while vocations in Europe dwindle.
So why has the Pope always been a white guy from Europe? Because the clergy was made up of white guys from Europe. But that is far less the case today. (Although the majority of clerics are still white guys.)
Calling Peter a "Palestinian?"
(I blame your source, not you.)
As you may know, the Tridentine Mass is an ancient and very reverent Holy Mass rite, and it was the only rite for Holy Mass for the entire Roman Catholic Church - until the modernist movement took control of Vatican II.
In response to the dramatic loss of attendance throughout Europe and the United States, and a corresponding increase in attendance at Mass performed by priests of the Society of Saint Pius X and others, modernist John Paul II, drafted "Ecclesia Dei", proclaiming any Roman Catholic priest could say a Holy Mass in the official language of The Church ( Latin ).
However, what the public relations splash didn't do was give attention to the usual fine print JP2 included in his encyclicals. "Ecclesia Dei"....demanded a local priest could perform the Traditional Latin Mass if he sought and received permission from his local bishop.
In the United States, only a handful of bishops have granted permission for their priests to say Holy Mass as it was done throughout the world for hundreds of years. It was a signature JP2 move: appear to give without giving.
Adhering to a foolish and dangerous contrivence named collegiality, JP2 - having appointed almost all of sitting bishops - knew his Tridentine Mass proclamation was nothing more than smoke and mirrors.
Inasmuch as you claim to be aware of "[Archbishop] Diaz", has he given the priests in his diocese permission to say the Tridentine Mass?
You claim "....he [was] a close friend of Mother Therese....".
Was he able to bring her attention to our Heavenly Father's First Commandment - persuading her to desist from the adoration of false gods (See the photos below.)?
The "we all pray to the same god" modernist movement now attempting to usurp His Church, can be read, as the accounts of Mother Teresa's movements were noted on the 25th anniversary of the order of nuns she initiated. Mother Teresa publicly took part in false god services at a number of locations. Some of the pagan rituals were photographed, as noted above.
The nun, writing the article for the order's paper, Missi noted an earlier occasion in which the then Cardinal Wojtyla and Mother Teresa were speakers at a Philadelphia "Eucharistic Congress".
How do you like those cookies? Kind of makes you wonder what else the modernists have in the oven, when God told the world they must come to Him through His Son!
Do you suppose Mother Teresa lost her Sacred Roman Rite Catholic Bible? Do you suppose there's an addendum to the Bible ( Like the third secret of Fatima! ) where The Almighty mentions Buddha, Kali, Mahavira, Vishnu, Shiva, Mohammad, and all the other 'gods' who sit with Him in Heaven!
I'm eager to learn what you know of this; from your perspective.....the story behind the story.
Well, first off, did you notice that I rescinded my comments about Diaz' relations to Mother Theresa. I have also heard other news stories which suggest a possible reason for why her canonization process has not been as quick as some had hopes. I refer not to the ridiculous rumor-mongering that the British press has been involved in; and I chalk some of her odd acquaintances to naivete. But I have heard other troubling reports which I decline to pass on so as to not spread gossip. This place is horrible for turning perceived slights into horrible apostasy. Suffice it to say, it would be taken as a sign that Mother Theresa did some things spiritually she ought not have done. So I have no rebuttal for what you write.
Meanwhile, I should very much like to know which Papabili have approved the Tridentine mass in their diocese. While I disagree with the reasons traditionalists have argued the Tridentine mass is necessary, I certainly think that Paul VI's suppression of it was a horrible abuse of papal power. (Why don't these liberals calling for a weaker papacy acknowledge that Paul VI's tactics were brutal?) Any Cardinal who has supported the Tridentine mass gets a huge boost in my eyes.