Who do you think will be the next Pope?greenspun.com : LUSENET : Catholic Pages Forum : One Thread |
This week Pope John Paul became the longest serving Pope this century (Pope Pius XII is now the second longest serving 20th Century Pope).I pray Pope John Paul will be with us for many years to come yet, and will be the Pope to open the Great Door for the Jubilee in the Year 2000.
He may even have time yet for another consistory in a few years' time to appoint more Cardinals.
But, who do you think would make a good Pope out of the current College of Cardinals? And which of the Cardinals do you actually think might become next Pope?
-- Anonymous, May 25, 1998
Whoever the Holy Spirit wants!
-- Anonymous, May 25, 1998
Please, God, ANYONE but Joseph Ratzinger! Actually, according to St. Malachy, it will be an Italian with high social status, involved with the organization re olives. He hasn't been wrong yet. I had always hoped the next pope would be Joseph Cardinal Bernadin, but alas...
-- Anonymous, June 15, 1998
Amen to that answer! I certainly have not a clue who would make the best Pope, thank goodness the Holy Spirit does.
-- Anonymous, May 25, 1998
Thank God we Catholics do not have to worry about such things. Our trust and faith in God is enough since He is the Leader and will guide us in such matters, for as He said, "Behold I am with you all day, even to the end of time." And again, He told us, "I will send you the Paraclete, the Spirit of Truth, who will guide you and teach you all things that you are to know."
-- Anonymous, June 07, 1998
If I had to guess, I'd say Bernardin Cardinal Gantin, the current Dean of the Sacred College of Cardinals and Prefect of the Sacred Congregation for Bishops. He's an African, and would be our first black pope in a VERY long time.
-- Anonymous, June 15, 1998
Gantin has to be near the top of the list, given his position and background. It would be good for the diversity of the Church for someone from a different part of the world to serve as Pope, I think. The Archbishop of Milan has been mentioned as a front-runner as well, but he is already fairly advanced in years. Politically, it would be difficult for someone from North or South America to become Pope at this stage, I thin. Let's all trust in the Holy Spirit to continue to guide the Church and the College of Cardinals when the time to select the next Pope eventually comes.
-- Anonymous, June 16, 1998
While there could be no better choice than Joseph Ratzinger, it is unlikely that he will be elected. A good alternative and a strong possibility would be Christoph Schonborn.
-- Anonymous, June 17, 1998
So far, most of you have put forward two highly-ranked Curial Cardinals as possibilites: Ratzinger and Gantin.
I agree that it's probably unlikely that Cardinal Ratzinger would be elected. And to some extent, I'm not sure he would make a good Pope. He certainly calls a spade a spade, and he's not afraid to say that maybe Pope Paul VI didn't make the wisest decision when he authorised the stripping of the liturgy. But, a Pope like that would make a lot of Cardinals uncomfortable, I'm sure!
As for Cardinal Gantin, I don't know that much about him except that he has been in the Curia for a very long time. I don't think the world is ready for an African Pope yet. And I'm not sure Gantin is as "conservative" on doctrinal issues as the Holy Father and many of the other Cardinals (compared to, say, Arinze). With the new rules about voting in Conclave, that may go against him.
I'm glad someone mentioned Cardinal Schonborn. He certainly seems to be being groomed for high office in the Church. But he is very young. The Cardinals may be reticent to put another young man in the See of Peter who would then likely reign for at least 20 years.
It's interesting to look back at earlier conclaves this century. Pius XI and Pius XII had both been Secretary of State. Many then expected Cardinal Merry del Val (Pius XII's Secretary of State) to be elected or Cardinal Siri, but John XXIII was elected who had been a Vatican Diplomat. Paul VI had fallen into disfavour with Pope Pius XII and had been "demoted up" to the See of Milan but denied the Cardinalate that normally went with that position. John XXIII made Paul VI cardinal soon after his election. Paul VI had been primarily a curial Cardinal and a papal diplomat.
The Cardinals then elected John Paul I and John Paul II, neither of whom had much or any Curial or Diplomatic experience. They were simply pastors of their flock.
It will be interesting to see whether the Cardinals return to someone bred in the Vatican again or still opts for a Pastoral man. I think it's fairly certain that they will want someone who will take as firm or firmer a stand on doctrinal issues as Pope John Paul II, so that rules out a number of Cardinals often touted as Papabile by the secular media. But, they'll also want someone who can engage people's affections as much as Pope John Paul II. For all his enemies in the Church, he is still the Pope who can bring 4 million Filipinos to his Mass!
I wonder whether there won't be another election from left field, someone like Cardinal Sin of Manila or one of the conservative Cardinals from South America. I think it's fairly safe to assume that it won't be an English-speaker, certainly not an American (no matter how able some of the American cardinals are), unlikely to be from a Western European country other than Italy...
It's amusing to speculate! Of course, the Holy Spirit already knows his man. Maybe he isn't even a cardinal yet. I wouldn't be surprised, with the loss of 7 electing Cardinals already since the February consistory this year, if the Holy Father doesn't hold another consistory during the Great Jubilee of the Year 2000.
St Malachy's prediction is that this next Pope will be "Gloria Olivae", the "Glory of the Olives". Someone here has already suggested that that means it will be an Italian. I'm not so sure. The motto could equally apply to any of the Cardinals from the Mediterranean: the Frenchman Etchegaray is from Marseilles, any of the Spanish Cardinals or the Spanish/Portuguese speaking Cardinals of South America.
Hmmmm.... :)
God bless,
Paul McLachlan
Webmaster, catholic-pages.com
-- Anonymous, June 17, 1998
Since this is "job" for the Holly Spirit, we can just especulate about the next Pope, probablly it's important to have again a no italian Pope since John Paul II has, not just because his personal carisma conquered so many people, but also because as a non italian, has a diferent point of view. I personally would like a third word country Pope (Latin America, Asia or Africa) since they directly know Spiritual and material, as well a Human rigths needs.
-- Anonymous, June 22, 1998
Traditionally, the Curia doesn't like to have two long pontificates back-to-back. John Paul II's pontificate has been the longest this century, and so we can expect an older cardinal to be chosen as pope. This is exactly what was intended when the Conclave elected the 66-year old Albino Luciani after the 15-year pontificate of Pope Paul VI. They, of course, didn't realize that Pope John Paul I's pontificate would be THAT short.The other thing is that, when Pope John Paul II took the Holy See in 1978, Italians had held the papacy for 455 years! After 20 years, to date, of not having it, they will want it back briefly before they give it up to another foreigner. His Holiness has stacked the College so that this wouldn't happen again, but we'll see...
Anyway, I think it's a safe bet to make that our next Pope will be an aged, Italian, Curia member intended to have a short pontificate.
Possible candidates are therefore: Lorenzo Cardinal Antonetti, Giovanni Cardinal Cheli, Angelo Cardinal Felice, Pio Cardinal Laghi, Dino Cardinal Monduzzi, Virgilio Cardinal Noe, Camillo Cardinal Ruini, Achille Cardinal Silvestrini, and Angelo Cardinal Sodano.
These are just the guys who fit the criteria I mentioned above. Of them, only Their Eminences Cardinals Ruini, Silvestrini, and Sodano have a real chance.
This is all, of course, one layman's opinion. I am NO authority! The choice belongs to the Holy Spirit, and the choice will be the right one.
Now, I'm pulling for Bernardin Cardinal Gantin...
-- Anonymous, June 30, 1998
Joseph,I'm interested in why you reduce your list of Italians to just Sodano, Ruini and Silvestrini.
I had understood that Cardinal Laghi had won tremendous admiration for his role at the head of the Pontifical Council for the Laity and he would certainly be well known to most of the Cardinals.
I would be surprised if Cardinal Sodano were elected. Although he would have to be in a prime position as Secretary of State.
I'm also not so sure that the Cardinals will opt for an older man to keep the Papacy quite short. People have come to expect that the Pope will travel the world, not convalesce in the Vatican. Pope John Paul has really established this pattern as the norm and the world will not respond well to a Pope who is too old to travel widely and meet with the people in the same dynamic way that our beloved John Paul II has. There is always the nagging reminder in the Malachy prophecies that this next pope may be the next-to-last! A longer papacy puts off the end of the world for a little longer! :) I know that sounds ridiculous, but these prophecies have a tendency to exert incredible pressure on people (a bit like the full moon and dogs!). The story goes that Cardinal Spellman of New York just prior to the Conclave that elected John XXIII sailed up and down the Tiber in a boat with sheep because the motto for the next Pope was "pastor et nauta" (shepherd and sailor/navigator) [John XXIII was Patriarch of Venice, which is why the motto is said to have suited him especially]! And at the time of the Conclave that elected John Paul I, there was a very lengthy and serious article on the prophecies and their importance in L'Osservatore Romano, the semi-official Vatican newspaper with admonitions to the Cardinals to consider their choice.
This is fun!
God bless, Paul McLachlan
-- Anonymous, July 01, 1998
Paul,You sure make some good points!
The list of Italian cardinals was just to show who fit the criteria I had established. Some of these guys, like Cardinals Antonetti and Cheli who are just too old (at 75 and 79, respectively). I think that Ruini and Sodano have the perfect balance of being young enough (sure, they are very old... I mean young as compared to the other Italians listed), experienced enough, and liked enough to have a real shot. As for Silvestrini, who is 74, I think he's a good guy, well respected by the College, who continues in spite of his age to hold some of the most important Curial posts and do well in his offices.
As for Laghi, I guess I should have put him on the list if I was to include Silvestrini. But, at 75 years, Laghi is older than Silvestrini by a year!
When I said that I thought our next pope would be an older man, I was thinking mid to upper 60s... not mid 70s.
Why would you be surprised if Sodano were elected? I would not be surprised at all. I'm really expecting either him or Ruini to be our next pope.
I truly think that there is enough modern precedent for an older man to be elected pope after John Paul II's exceptionally long and popular pontificate. I mentioned the election of John Paul I after Paul VI as an example. Here's another: when Pius XII (19-year pontificate) died, the Conclave elected the 77-year old Angelo Roncalli to ensure a short pontificate. Boy they must have been surprised when this Pope John XXIII lived until the age of 82, completing a pontificate of 5 years.
As for the Malachy Prophesies... I can't believe you brought that up! They are amazingly accurate for 1143-1591, but after 1591 are amazingly vague and open to much interpretation. Most Catholic scholars don't believe that St. Malachy, Bishop of Armagh, actually wrote the prophesies. If you ask me, they were written by someone in the late sixteenth century!
You mentioned that John XXIII had been Patriarch of Venice. So was John Paul I, so maybe we should consider Marco Cardinal Ci as a possible candidate for the next pope, no?
This IS fun!
Joe
-- Anonymous, July 01, 1998
Paul,Do you know where I can find a copy of the Prophecies of St Malachy on the web? English or Latin...
Joe
-- Anonymous, July 03, 1998
Joe,
I'm very disappointed in you! They're on my web-site!
http://www.catholic-pages.com/grabbag/malachy.htm
I also have the book on them from TAN books, which I eventually intend to use to expand what is already there, particularly some of the interpretations of the Latin mottoes. Regards, Paul
-- Anonymous, July 03, 1998
Oops! Sorry Paul! So, what credibility do you give to the prophesies? After Pope Gregory XIV they are just vague enough to be widely interpreted. The "pastor et nauta" for John XXIII, for example, I thought made no sense. Sure he was Patriarch of Venice, but he was by no means unique in this, and I'm not familiar with any other maritime connections with John XXIII. Joe
-- Anonymous, July 03, 1998
The TAN book gives them credence and offers arguments for why they were undiscovered for so long.I think they're great primarily for their fun value. But, as I said in my post, people tend to discount them and write them off, but then along comes a conclave and people go mad about them! I would love to verify whether the story about Cardinal Spellman is true or not.
The Times of London always carries a spate of Letters to the Editor at the time of conclave interpreting the prophecies.
Like all prophecy, I tend to take it with a grain of salt. If I'm living life the way the Church wants me to live it and striving for holiness, I have nothing to fear. I guess we'll know if the Pope after this next one is Petrus Romanus or not... :)
I tend to think the last few are quite apt and don't require too much stretching of the imagination...:
Pastor angelicus: Pius XII (He was known as the Angelic Pastor, but also apparently was very mystical and is rumoured to have had several visions)
Pastor et nauta: John XXIII (I think navigating the Church through the Pastoral Council -- Vatican II -- is a better interpretation than the mere fact that he came to Rome from Venice)
Flos florum: Paul VI (this is thought to relate the Fleur-de-Lis on his coat of arms)
De mediatate Lumen: John Paul I (between the moons/of the half-moon -- relates to the length of his papacy)
De solis labore: John Paul II (Labor from the sun, worker from the sun -- came from behind the Iron Curtain, one of the few Popes to have worked in the secular world before becoming a priest)
Which leaves us Gloria Olivae and Petrus Romanus....
Note: I think I enjoy these prophecies most from a linguistic, crossword-puzzle kind of bent rather than any real belief in their authenticity.
wrt our earlier discussion about Sodano & Ruini, I've heard whispers that doubt the doctrinal orthodoxy of at least Sodano. That disqualifies him immediately in my books, if they are true. I think the next Pope is inevitably going to be a doctrinal giant, and needs to be. I think those who accuse JP2 of being hard-line are going to pine for a return to his style of papacy once he dies! Sodano has no doubt proven himself diplomatically, but I don't think that's enough. And I think JP2 has put the talented less-conservative cardinals in the Secretariat of State (Casaroli then Sodano) rather than risk putting them at the head of one of the Congregations. Sodano quoted Hans Kung favorably in a speech a month or two back. There was nothing heterodox about the quote. It was from Kung's earlier work. But, merely quoting someone like Kung sends a political message.
So, will we have a John Paul III or a Pius XIII do you think?
God bless, Paul
-- Anonymous, July 03, 1998
>I think they're great primarily for their fun value.
I agree completely.
>Like all prophecy, I tend to take it with a grain of salt. If I'm living
>life the way the Church wants me to live it and striving for holiness, I
>have nothing to fear. I guess we'll know if the Pope after this next one
>is Petrus Romanus or not... :)The Catholic Encyclopedia makes a good point: the Malachy Prophesies never say that Petrus Romanus is the immediate successor of Gloria Olivae, just that he followed him. Heck, there might be a thousand more popes after Gloria Olivae before Peter of Rome comes along!
Remember that if Petrus Romanus is the successor of Gloria Olivae, then he is alive right now!
Here's the other thing: if St. Malachy really received this prophesy, then he was told secrets about the end of the world. When the Apostles asked Jesus about it, He replied that "Only the Father who is in heaven knows the hour." If Christ himself, while Man, did not know, then why would the Spirit reveal it to a 12th century bishop?
>Flos florum: Paul VI (this is thought to relate the Fleur-de-Lis on his
>coat of arms)The fleur-de-lis is a symbol of Mary, and is on the coat-of-arms of MANY clerics now and in the past. Paul VI was surely not the only cardinal at the time using the fleur-de-lis on his coat-of-arms!
>Which leaves us Gloria Olivae and Petrus Romanus....
We agree, I think, that the clue "Gloria Olivae" could make his country of origin Italy, Spain, Greece, north Africa, etc. But an Italian (like I'M predicting) as our next pope would fit.
What I mean is, the clue is not limited to but includes Italians.
>That disqualifies him
>immediately in my books, if they are true. I think the next Pope is
>inevitably going to be a doctrinal giant, and needs to be.I disagree. I think our next pope will be a 2/3-year pontiff to bridge the gap between the long and popular pontificate of John Paul II, and the hopefully long and popular pontificate of our next pope's successor (who will not be Italian). The way the College is grooming Christopher Cardinal Schonborn, I would fully expect him to be John Paul II's successor's successor.
>I think those
>who accuse JP2 of being hard-line are going to pine for a return to his
>style of papacy once he dies!John Paul II has rigged it that way with the "majority vote after 30 elections" rule. The two-thirds requirement had stopped many hard-nose conservatives and many hard-nose liberals from gaining the papacy... that's why it was created I supose. But our Pope has stacked the College full of conservatives and changed the two-thirds requirement so that no "compromise popes" would be elected. I think it was brilliant!
>Sodano has no doubt proven himself
>diplomatically, but I don't think that's enough. And I think JP2 has put
>the talented less-conservative cardinals in the Secretariat of State
>(Casaroli then Sodano) rather than risk putting them at the head of one of
>the Congregations.That's a really good point. Casaroli was not the most conservative cardinal, that's for sure.
>So, will we have a John Paul III or a Pius XIII do you think?
I think our next pope will take the name John Paul III, unless possibly if his own baptismal name is appropriate. e.g. Julius Riyadi Cardinal Darmaatmadja, S.J., might want to take the name Julius IV, Stephan Sou Hwan Cardinal Kim might take Stephen XI, Pio Cardinal Laghi or Pio Taofinu'u, S.M., might take Pius XIII, Nicolas de Jesus Cardinal Lopez Rodriguez might take Nicholas V, John Cardinal O'Connor or Juan Cardinal Sandoval Iniguez might take John XXIV, Paul Joseph Cardinal Pham Dinh Tung or Paul Cardinal Poupard or Paul Cardinal Shan Kuo-Shi or Paulos Cardinal Tzadua might take Paul VII, Alexandre Cardinal Josi Maria dos Santos, O.F.M., might take Alexander IX, Adrianus Johannes Cardinal Simonis might take Hadrian VII.
The only one of these guys who has a real shot is Cardinal Laghi, who might just take Pius XIII... I would if I were him. Otherwise I'm expecting a John Paul III.
This whole idea is strange for me because, as I am 18 years old, I have only known one pope, and so in my mind the papacy is wholly personified in John Paul II. It will be strange when he dies... I pray it's not for years!
Joe
-- Anonymous, July 03, 1998
I think the thing that is most worrisome about the prophecies is that it includes anti-Popes. If God showed Malachy all the Popes until the Second Coming, why did he throw in the pretenders? The TAN book argues that we only know they're anti-Popes with the benefit of hindsight and the judgment of the Church. St Vincent Ferrer followed an anti-Pope, so St Malachy might have prophesied anti-Popes. I don't find that very convincing.I'm not very impressed with the argument that there might be several popes between Gloria Olivae and Petrus Romanus. Why prophesy all of these and then skip one or two or several hundred?
I don't think this is necessarily revealing the "hour" of the Second Coming to anyone, including Malachy. I think it is more likely that Malachy just saw the Popes and gave them a motto, rather than knowing precisely when they would each reign.
I don't think there need only be one cardinal who fits the motto, just as long as the one who is selected does.
I agree that Schonborn is looking like an excellent candidate for a future papacy. But, the Cardinals have been burnt too many times with bridge papacies. I am sure they will be very wary before they put in a supposedly short-term candidate in case we end up with Vatican III!
You obviously don't believe the Church is in distress as much as I do. I think even 3-5 years under a Pope who is not doctrinally firm will put the Church back 30 years. All the victories that are only now being won, like curbing liturgical abuses, considering a re-reform of the Mass, the curbing of public dissent by theologians -- these will all be in vain if their proponents are allowed to run amok for any period of time. So we'll either need a strong curia or a strong Pope.
I really don't give the Italians so much of a chance as you, either. The days are gone where there were only 60 Cardinals in the College and half of them were Italian. And the days are gone where almost all of the Curia (ie, the only well-known Cardinals) were Italian. The College is international and the Curia is international. I think a bloc of Italians might try to put an Italian in place, but they won't succeed. Even if they all voted together (which is highly unlikely), they just don't have the numbers anymore and most non-Italians don't feel any necessity for the Pope to be Italian anymore.
And as you say, the fact that a solid majority of conservatives can now sit out 30 ballots rather than find a compromise candidate acceptable to a two-thirds majority is going to change everything.
As for names, I think they signify too much for someone just to take their baptismal name. A Pius XIII will send a clear, unspoken message that the Church didn't begin in 1962 and we can be proud of our entire doctrinal and liturgical tradition. It will signal that the days are gone where people can trick the faithful into believing that Vatican II changed doctrine. A John Paul III, on the other hand, will show that the Pope wants to continue in exactly the same vein as our current Pontiff. Perhaps a Pope Pius John Paul I to signal a move to integrate the preconciliar with the post-conciliar!!
Perhaps we'll have a Leo XIV or another Gregory....
If Gloria Olivae is going to be a Benedictine (Cardinal Hume?!) as the Benedictines have traditionally believed, maybe we'll have another Pope Benedict...
I know what you mean about only knowing one Pope. I was born in Pope Paul VI's reign and have vague recollections of seeing the news reports about the election of Pope John Paul II with the white smoke on the TV screen, but I certainly have no recollection of any Pope but this one.
God bless, Paul
-- Anonymous, July 03, 1998
>I think the thing that is most worrisome about the prophecies is that it
>includes anti-Popes. If God showed Malachy all the Popes until the Second
>Coming, why did he throw in the pretenders? The TAN book argues that we
>only know they're anti-Popes with the benefit of hindsight and the judgment
>of the Church. St Vincent Ferrer followed an anti-Pope, so St Malachy
>might have prophesied anti-Popes. I don't find that very convincing.I agree with you completely that the inclusion of anti-popes in the list hurts its authenticity.
Oo, here's an idea. The Church itself has the power to decide which pope is the true Successor of Peter and which is a pretender (anti-pope) when two sit on the pontificate at the same time. The power to do this came from Christ (potestas clavium). When God showed St. Malachy the popes from his time on, those decisions had not yet been made by the Church. So by showing St. Malachy both, God re-affirmed the Church's power to make that decision, even though He of course already knew what that decision would be. Still, it had not been made yet!
>I'm not very impressed with the argument that there might be several popes
>between Gloria Olivae and Petrus Romanus. Why prophesy all of these and
>then skip one or two or several hundred?I'd like to read the Latin. Between the other ones, does it give some note of succession that it omits between Gloria Olivae and Petrus Romanus?
Is this "Petrus Romanus" going to take the name Peter II on his assumption of the pontificate?!
>I agree that Schonborn is looking like an excellent candidate for a future
>papacy. But, the Cardinals have been burnt too many times with bridge
>papacies. I am sure they will be very wary before they put in a supposedly
>short-term candidate in case we end up with Vatican III!You think a Vatican III is coming soon?
>You obviously don't believe the Church is in distress as much as I do. I
>think even 3-5 years under a Pope who is not doctrinally firm will put the
>Church back 30 years. All the victories that are only now being won, like
>curbing liturgical abuses, considering a re-reform of the Mass, the curbing
>of public dissent by theologians -- these will all be in vain if their
>proponents are allowed to run amok for any period of time. So we'll either
>need a strong curia or a strong Pope.No, I do agree with this. The Liturgy, especially, needs a big overhall, but John Paul II has installed into the College a vast majority of conservatives who just might get this job done. I just don't think a doctrinally weak pope would be elected by this Conclave, so I'm not too worried about it.
>I really don't give the Italians so much of a chance as you, either. The
>days are gone where there were only 60 Cardinals in the College and half of
>them were Italian. And the days are gone where almost all of the Curia
>(ie, the only well-known Cardinals) were Italian. The College is
>international and the Curia is international. I think a bloc of Italians
>might try to put an Italian in place, but they won't succeed. Even if they
>all voted together (which is highly unlikely), they just don't have the
>numbers anymore and most non-Italians don't feel any necessity for the Pope
>to be Italian anymore.But I think that the non-Italian members of the College wouldn't mind giving the pontificate back to the Italians for 2/3 years, since it would mean that the next pope, who would hold the pontificate for much longer, would be non-Italian... say Dutch! It's sort of a trade off, which I think the non-Italians wouldn't mind at all. There are some good Italian candidates for the papacy: Ruini, Silvestrini, Laghi.
>And as you say, the fact that a solid majority of conservatives can now sit
>out 30 ballots rather than find a compromise candidate acceptable to a
>two-thirds majority is going to change everything.And for that reason I'm not too worried about a liberal, or even moderate, or a doctrinally weak successor. He just couldn't get the votes from a firmly rightist Conclave.
>As for names, I think they signify too much for someone just to take their
>baptismal name. A Pius XIII will send a clear, unspoken message that the
>Church didn't begin in 1962 and we can be proud of our entire doctrinal and
>liturgical tradition. It will signal that the days are gone where people
>can trick the faithful into believing that Vatican II changed doctrine.Good point.
>A
>John Paul III, on the other hand, will show that the Pope wants to continue
>in exactly the same vein as our current Pontiff.That's what I was thinking.
>Perhaps a Pope Pius John
>Paul I to signal a move to integrate the preconciliar with the
>p;post-conciliar!!Yikes...
>If Gloria Olivae is going to be a Benedictine (Cardinal Hume?!) as the
>Benedictines have traditionally believed, maybe we'll have another Pope
>Benedict...Well, there are only three cardinals in the College who are Benedictines: Paul Augustin Cardinal Mayer, O.S.B. (87-years old), Hans Hermann Cardinal Groer, O.S.B. (I won't even COMMENT on this guy), and George Basil Cardinal Hume, O.S.B. (they don't grow olives in England!).
Joe
-- Anonymous, July 03, 1998
>I'd like to read the Latin. Between the other ones,
>does it give some note of succession that it omits between
>Gloria Olivae and Petrus Romanus?None of the other mottoes have notes of succession, why would you want to see one here?
The following is the actual text:
In persecutione extrema S.R.E. sedebit Petrus Romanus, qui pascet oues in multis tribulationibus: quibus transactis ciuitas septicollis diruetur, & Iudex tremjdus iudicabit populum suum. Finis.
(In extreme persecution, the seat of the Holy Roman Church will be occupied by Peter the Roman, who will feed the sheep through many tribulations, at the term of which the city of seven hills will be destroyed, and the formidable Judge will judge his people. The End.)I've even read somewhere that there is nothing to say that Petrus Romanus isn't the same pope as Gloria Olivae! (ie, it is an epilogue and Gloria Olivae is the last...)
>Is this "Petrus Romanus" going to take the name Peter II
>on his assumption of the pontificate?!That's the most common interpretation, I think. But it would be a fairly brave move, wouldn't it, for the Pope to sit in the Sistine Chapel and when asked "By what name do you wish to be known?", he responds "Peter"!
>You think a Vatican III is coming soon?
No. But that's precisely my point. The Cardinals who elected John XXIII didn't think a Vatican II was coming soon either. Until then Ecumenical Councils were only called in times of doctrinal crisis. In 1962, the Church was, at least on the surface, not in crisis at all.
We probably are in times of crisis now, but I think the Pope is doing a much better job on his own and needs to, rather than calling a Vatican III. There is an erroneous view prevalent today that the Pope is subject to the College of Bishops. Another Council would send the message that the Pope cannot make any important decisions unless he has the majority vote of the Bishops in Council.
>since it would mean that the next pope, who would hold
>the pontificate for much longer, would be non-Italian... say
>Dutch! It's sort of a trade off, which I think the non-Italians
>wouldn't mind at all.I have to say, I still don't see the need for a trade-off. I'm not sure the Italians have that much influence anymore, even to make any of them sentimental favourites. And Dutch?! Do you have anyone particular in mind?
It's a shame in a lot of ways that the older Cardinals can no longer vote in Conclave. I'm sure I would very much like any Pope who was voted for by the likes of Cardinal Gagnon and Cardinal Stickler. :)
>Hans Hermann Cardinal Groer, O.S.B. (I won't even
>COMMENT on this guy) Actually, as I understand it, Cardinal Groer has renounced his rights to enter the Conclave at all. Despite the fact that noone would vote for him, on a more general level, if you aren't in there voting, you won't be voted for.I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Holy Father has time for one more consistory before he dies. He may well appoint a Benedictine next year or the year after. Maybe we should be watching Benedictine Archbishops in major Archdioceses or Curial positions!
God bless,
Paul
-- Anonymous, July 03, 1998