Skip to comments.Filipino Cardinal Stirs Papal Talk With Rapid Rise
Posted on 03/07/2013 5:52:48 AM PST by Biggirl
IMUS, Philippines (AP) -- Asia's most prominent Roman Catholic leader knows how to reach the masses: He sings on stage, preaches on TV, brings churchgoers to laughter and tears with his homilies. And he's on Facebook.
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
He is already being overtaken by Ranjith as the best respresentative of Asian Catholicism and of non-European Catholicism. See Moynihan’s letter no. 31.
Letter no. 36
May Cardinal Tagle bring in some good Pakikisama to the enclave. Is he a protege of Cardinal Sin?
From the article:
“The Filipino prelate’s chances are considered remote, as many believe that Latin America or Africa - with their faster growing Catholic flocks - would be more logical choices if the papal electors look beyond Europe. But even the hint of papal consideration has electrified many in the heavily Catholic Philippines, where past pontiffs had been welcomed by millions with rock-star intensity.”
That could be a plus for Tangle, considering that, when you think of it, Blessed John Paul was in his late 50’s when he was elected Pope. Plus also knowledge of internet social media, which can help bring the faith to younger Catholics.
The question I have is this: Does Cardinal Ranjith have interest in witnessing for Christ via social media? If not, that could go against him being “Papal” material.
The Philippines has a town named after Don Imus?
Well that even took me by surprise.
I think Cardinal Ranjith is open to using any means necessary to promote the Gospel and build the Church. I like Tagle, but I think he’s going to be perceived as way too young. It is said that the general feeling is that the Church doesn’t need another almost 30-year papacy (like that of JPII), so they’ll probably want somebody at least in his 60s.
That said, I don’t think the Church in the Philippines is quite as bad off as it is in other parts of the “developing world” such as Latin America and Africa. Filipinos have maintained popular devotions and seem to have fairly orthodox instruction, and are big supporters of the traditional (pre-Vat II) mass. And of course, the Philippines has been living through attacks from Islam for many years now, so they know all about that problem!
Look for a cardinal between mid-50’s through the 60’s to be elected so at least to put a good number of years in so as to fully restore the Church.
I look at Tagle, Ranjith, Burke, Oullet as good canidates. But overall, let the Holy Spirit DO HIS WORK.
I sense a less rushed conclave, more prayful at that.
No conclave since 1830 has lasted more than a week.
The past eleven conclaves, going back 167 years, have averaged 3.5 days with no conclave lasting more than 5 days.
The longer conclaves that proceeded the 1846 conclave were generally longer not because they were "more prayerful" but because various monarchs did their best to intrude on and game the proceedings.
These long conclaves were characterized more by acrimony than meditative prayer.
If this conclave lasts more than 5 days, it is not necessarily a positive sign, nor is it an indication that the cardinals have been more prayerful than their colleagues in the past who - after brief deliberations - gave the Church Blessed Pius IX, St. Pius X, Blessed Pius XII, Blessed John XXIII and Servant of God John Paul II, as well as Benedict XVI.
I think he will be the next Pope. At least that is what I am praying.
**The Filipino prelates chances are considered remote**
So was the name of Karol Wotyla considered remote.
I would be surprised if it goes beyond 7 days myself.
Got to remember that we are now in the middle of Lent, early Easter this year and those same cardinals want to get back to their home countries for the events of Holy Week/Easter.
But at the same time too, remember the last conclave lasted only a day and I sense that B16 became Pope only because Blessed JP2 from his death bed asked him to take the honor, but that is me.
Unlike this cardinal, he was a low-profile unknown (as far as the public was concerned) going into his conclave.
By many accounts, he was chosen because he had impressed many of his fellow cardinals the month before, when he had participated in the conclave for John Paul I.
I do not know if there is any info on this but was there a conclave during the middle ages that went so long that the people of the time got fed up and ended up storming the location just to demand there be a new Pope?
When Blessed John Paul II was still Cardinal Karol Wotyla, in 1969, he came to New Britain, CT, USA to visit the Polish Catholic commnities their. At one of the Catholic parishs, there is I believe a dedicated to him a shrine.
Opps, “there” instead of their.
The last conclave had four ballots.
It took only 3 to elect Pius XII.
Are you saying that John Paul II had somehow designated Benedict XVI as his successor?