Pope Francis Has Died

[LordSunhawk]

I am actually pretty optimistic about Leo XIV

• Has been strong on life issues throughout his career
• Strongly rejected the teaching of gender theory and pro-LGBT topics
• Strongly opposed women in the priesthood (should be a no-brainer but a few of the supposedly papabile cardinals have supported this)
• If you read the text of his opposition to Vance on immigration the dispute was far more philosophical than practical, as Bishop in Peru he worked hard to improve local conditions in order to keep people from feeling that they had to become refugees and was, in general, quite successful at it
  • That being said, it is incumbent on any priest, bishop, or Pope to advocate for the dispossessed, the poor, and the unwanted refugee. Calling for charity and compassion for them is part of the job and will always put any religious leader in tension to a nationalist one, as it should be.
• His choice of a papal name is highly suggestive, Pope's don't pick them on a whim or for nefarious purposes.
  • Leo XIII was a very strong opponent of modernism, and repeatedly warned against change for the sake of change, while also being clear that the Church had to prayerfully and cautiously adjust to changing circumstances in order to fulfill the Church's great charge of ministry.
  • Leo XIII was also an extremely strong opponent of socialist thought infiltrating the Church and regularly warned about the temptation to conflate socialism with true Christian social justice. Leo XIII taught that true social justice required recognizing the inherent dignity of all people, not simply chosen groups, and that human dignity required that those who desired temporal power must, first and foremost, serve those whom they would lead, rather than demand to be served by them, and must lead them in ways that bettered those who followed rather than those who led.
• In contrast to Francis, Leo XIV is a highly educated theologian with an extremely solid grounding in Catholic theology, I have read reports that his doctoral thesis was explicitly about Leo XIII, and his actions as priest, bishop, and cardinal all show a fidelity to those teachings
• It is very tempting, and very wrong, to think of Francis as some sort of wild-eyed radical. If one were to read what he actually said, rather than what the media claimed he said, he never actually advocated for radicalism. He was tolerant of some who did, especially the German church leadership, but while tolerant of their antics he never affirmed or subscribed to them, and when push came to shove he always came down against them.
  • The exception was his opposition to the TLM, however Pope Saint John Paul II also was uncomfortable with the TLM and felt it weakened the unity of the church in opposition to the Novus Ordo. Leo XIV was known to permit the TLM in his diocese, so it is likely that the pendulum will shift on that.
  • Much is made about how Francis created so many cardinals and thus they must be 'progressives', the truth is when you look at who he raised to the rank of cardinal the vast majority were theologically conservative and traditionalist.
    • Again, do not mistake temporal political alignment with theological alignment, and do not make the mistake of ascribing temporal political movements to genuine Christian theology.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

So, there's an interview with Prevost's brother where brother may have let slip something really... weird. He claims that about a day after Bergolio's death, his brother was one of three finalists for the papacy.

It's a curious thing to say.

Edit: That sort of shit is actually a violation of the Conclave. It means there was collaboration behind the scenes- a pact. Which is against the rules. Not that it'll matter. I'm sure this will be dismissed. Just like with Bergolio, Pervost's history and criticisms are being massaged, scrubbed, or memory-holed.

That's a huge stretch, and impossibly vague to prove. The cardinals don't even really talk to each other during the conclave; the time between ballots is spent in prayer and spiritual meditation, and they are strictly isolated from outside communications.

It's so strict that *whole chickens* and *pies* are strictly prohibited because someone could smuggle a note inside one. All food items that *could* conceal a note have to be cut apart into individual servings and inspected. More modern restrictions include a total ban on electronic devices -- all the cardinals are politely but firmly searched as they enter the Sistine Chapel -- backed up by not only military-grade signal jammers (against both Wi-Fi and cellular), but outright shutdown of all cell phone towers within range of the Sistine.

 

[Poe]

I for one am glad to have a pope from my home state. Anyway its about time the pope was American

 

[ShadowArxxy]

• The exception was his opposition to the TLM, however Pope Saint John Paul II also was uncomfortable with the TLM and felt it weakened the unity of the church in opposition to the Novus Ordo. Leo XIV was known to permit the TLM in his diocese, so it is likely that the pendulum will shift on that.

On that note, word is that His Holiness' first Mass tomorrow will be a Latin Mass.

This will be a private Mass in the Sistine Chapel with only the cardinals attending (most new Popes have done this); his first public mass will be later, in St. Peter's Square.

 

[posh-goofiness]

That's a huge stretch, and impossibly vague to prove. The cardinals don't even really talk to each other during the conclave; the time between ballots is spent in prayer and spiritual meditation, and they are strictly isolated from outside communications.

It's so strict that *whole chickens* and *pies* are strictly prohibited because someone could smuggle a note inside one. All food items that *could* conceal a note have to be cut apart into individual servings and inspected. More modern restrictions include a total ban on electronic devices -- all the cardinals are politely but firmly searched as they enter the Sistine Chapel -- backed up by not only military-grade signal jammers (against both Wi-Fi and cellular), but outright shutdown of all cell phone towers within range of the Sistine.

It's not during the conclave this implicates. It's the lead up.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

It's not during the conclave this implicates. It's the lead up.

Cardinals are not prohibited from discussing during the lead up, however -- believe me, if the Church felt it was necessary, they *could* have all the College of Cardinals in isolation as soon as the Pope passes.

 

[posh-goofiness]

Cardinals are not prohibited from discussing during the lead up, however -- believe me, if the Church felt it was necessary, they *could* have all the College of Cardinals in isolation as soon as the Pope passes.

Discussion, sure. Not wheeling and dealing. In either case, I'm likely being too paranoid off too little info.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

Discussion, sure. Not wheeling and dealing. In either case, I'm likely being too paranoid off too little info.

There's always been wheeling and dealing. It's *not* against the rules, and the entire point of secret ballots is to insulate against dealmaking (just as it is in secular politics).

 

[S'task]

I am actually pretty optimistic about Leo XIV

• Has been strong on life issues throughout his career
• Strongly rejected the teaching of gender theory and pro-LGBT topics
• Strongly opposed women in the priesthood (should be a no-brainer but a few of the supposedly papabile cardinals have supported this)
• If you read the text of his opposition to Vance on immigration the dispute was far more philosophical than practical, as Bishop in Peru he worked hard to improve local conditions in order to keep people from feeling that they had to become refugees and was, in general, quite successful at it
  • That being said, it is incumbent on any priest, bishop, or Pope to advocate for the dispossessed, the poor, and the unwanted refugee. Calling for charity and compassion for them is part of the job and will always put any religious leader in tension to a nationalist one, as it should be.
• His choice of a papal name is highly suggestive, Pope's don't pick them on a whim or for nefarious purposes.
  • Leo XIII was a very strong opponent of modernism, and repeatedly warned against change for the sake of change, while also being clear that the Church had to prayerfully and cautiously adjust to changing circumstances in order to fulfill the Church's great charge of ministry.
  • Leo XIII was also an extremely strong opponent of socialist thought infiltrating the Church and regularly warned about the temptation to conflate socialism with true Christian social justice. Leo XIII taught that true social justice required recognizing the inherent dignity of all people, not simply chosen groups, and that human dignity required that those who desired temporal power must, first and foremost, serve those whom they would lead, rather than demand to be served by them, and must lead them in ways that bettered those who followed rather than those who led.
• In contrast to Francis, Leo XIV is a highly educated theologian with an extremely solid grounding in Catholic theology, I have read reports that his doctoral thesis was explicitly about Leo XIII, and his actions as priest, bishop, and cardinal all show a fidelity to those teachings
• It is very tempting, and very wrong, to think of Francis as some sort of wild-eyed radical. If one were to read what he actually said, rather than what the media claimed he said, he never actually advocated for radicalism. He was tolerant of some who did, especially the German church leadership, but while tolerant of their antics he never affirmed or subscribed to them, and when push came to shove he always came down against them.
  • The exception was his opposition to the TLM, however Pope Saint John Paul II also was uncomfortable with the TLM and felt it weakened the unity of the church in opposition to the Novus Ordo. Leo XIV was known to permit the TLM in his diocese, so it is likely that the pendulum will shift on that.
  • Much is made about how Francis created so many cardinals and thus they must be 'progressives', the truth is when you look at who he raised to the rank of cardinal the vast majority were theologically conservative and traditionalist.
    • Again, do not mistake temporal political alignment with theological alignment, and do not make the mistake of ascribing temporal political movements to genuine Christian theology.

I genuinely hope you're right. But this happened fast and his close alignment with Francis worries me.

 

[Abhorsen]

It is very tempting, and very wrong, to think of Francis as some sort of wild-eyed radical. If one were to read what he actually said, rather than what the media claimed he said, he never actually advocated for radicalism. He was tolerant of some who did, especially the German church leadership, but while tolerant of their antics he never affirmed or subscribed to them, and when push came to shove he always came down against them.

• The exception was his opposition to the TLM, however Pope Saint John Paul II also was uncomfortable with the TLM and felt it weakened the unity of the church in opposition to the Novus Ordo. Leo XIV was known to permit the TLM in his diocese, so it is likely that the pendulum will shift on that.
• Much is made about how Francis created so many cardinals and thus they must be 'progressives', the truth is when you look at who he raised to the rank of cardinal the vast majority were theologically conservative and traditionalist.
  • Again, do not mistake temporal political alignment with theological alignment, and do not make the mistake of ascribing temporal political movements to genuine Christian theology.

I very much disagree with this point when it comes to Pope Francis.

Francis couldn't correctly tell who was saved and who was not. Notably, his statement that "All religions are paths to God. I will use an analogy, they are like different languages that express the divine." Which is simply not true, there's exactly one path, and that is Jesus. The Holy See then repeatedly translated that differently to hide what he was saying. Or there was the time that he said that a boy could pray to his atheist father in heaven. Or I could go on. This lack of understanding about the gospel was really, really bad coming from a pope.

 

[nemo1986]

I genuinely hope you're right. But this happened fast and his close alignment with Francis worries me.

To be fair, conclaves usually do around four rounds of voting.

 

[LordSunhawk]

Modern conclaves are usually between 3 to 6 rounds of voting, there hasn't been a 'long' conclave for a *very* long time.

And remember, Francis was not a theologian himself, he was a pastor and came from a pastoral background. So yes, he probably said many things that had the theologians cringing, but notably he *never* included any of that nonsense in anything 'official', and he most certainly deferred to the theologians when actually writing encyclicals and such. Yes, there were the dubia, but contrary to media reports, most pontiffs have had cardinals issue dubia, and by all reports the vast majority of the cardinals involved were satisfied with his response and certainly didn't consider it to be a hostile process.

And I have heard that his first mass will, indeed, be a TLM, which raises my hopes for him considerably. I've attended a TLM high mass and it was the most profoundly moving mass I've ever been to.

 

[Blasterbot]

I very much disagree with this point when it comes to Pope Francis.

Francis couldn't correctly tell who was saved and who was not. Notably, his statement that "All religions are paths to God. I will use an analogy, they are like different languages that express the divine." Which is simply not true, there's exactly one path, and that is Jesus. The Holy See then repeatedly translated that differently to hide what he was saying. Or there was the time that he said that a boy could pray to his atheist father in heaven. Or I could go on. This lack of understanding about the gospel was really, really bad coming from a pope.

Francis was a well meaning kind and compassionate man. unfortunately that is not the qualifications needed to be the pope. his actions were meant to draw in a whole bunch of progressive new people into the church. it failed. people who chose to join joined the catholic church in spite of him and the new people wanted a more traditional and conservative church. not in the sense of political conservative either. they wanted that tradition and ritual in their mass. that was what drew them in. that is what he failed at.

I'll have hope for the new pope until he proves me wrong. if he has some political disagreements with Vance and Trump I don't care much. if he twists the church for his politics I will take issue.

 

[King Krávoka]

My Mother thought that I cared about this for some unfathomable reason and She sent My Brother to wake Me up for this.

 

[LordSunhawk]

Oh, and one thing to point out about Pope Francis and his 'hostility' to the Latin mass... he fully supported the Priestly Fraternity of St Peter and St Paul, which exclusively uses the Latin liturgy. He opposed it being used in regular parishes, wanting instead uniformity in the mass and the exclusive use of Novus Ordo.

 

[Blasterbot]

My Mother thought that I cared about this for some unfathomable reason and She sent My Brother to wake Me up for this.

my mom asked me about who I hoped would be the pope and didn't know about Cardinal Sarah. I couldn't actually say why as my sister was in the room and would not have appreciated the reasoning.

 

[mrttao]

Yeah, I'm gonna call this now, he's a "moderate" in the same sense that Obama was. Looking into his history he came up through the American Catholic seminaries at the height of their most progressive and infiltrated by homosexuals, and the fact he was the guy who the prior Pope trusted to vet Bishops and such means he's going to be closely ideologically aligned with him.

He also literally said

In Italian: "Together we must try to find out how to be a church that builds bridges, establishes dialogue and is open to receives everybody,"

welcome everyone to the church means inviting LGBTQP to the church.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

Modern conclaves are usually between 3 to 6 rounds of voting, there hasn't been a 'long' conclave for a *very* long time.

And remember, Francis was not a theologian himself, he was a pastor and came from a pastoral background. So yes, he probably said many things that had the theologians cringing, but notably he *never* included any of that nonsense in anything 'official', and he most certainly deferred to the theologians when actually writing encyclicals and such. Yes, there were the dubia, but contrary to media reports, most pontiffs have had cardinals issue dubia, and by all reports the vast majority of the cardinals involved were satisfied with his response and certainly didn't consider it to be a hostile process.

And I have heard that his first mass will, indeed, be a TLM, which raises my hopes for him considerably. I've attended a TLM high mass and it was the most profoundly moving mass I've ever been to.

It would be amazing if His Holiness also chooses to do his public Inaugural Mass as a TLM.

 

[Buba]

He claims that about a day after Bergolio's death, his brother was one of three finalists for the papacy.

Rose tinted glasses of sibling?

Anyway its about time the pope was American

Akshualy ... Francis I was American - he from America.


Re TLM - during my Religious Phase I attended once and was bored out of my tits. To be honest, as this was during the reign of the Gtreat Supressor of TLM - John Paul II - it was at the only church in metro Warsaw (2,5M) permitted to use this Rite, hence packed to the rafters (with smartly dressed young people!) and with little air to breath.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

welcome everyone to the church means inviting LGBTQP to the church.

Being open to everyone does not mean endorsing everyone, and regardless of one's theological opinions towards certain groups, what good is a Church that doesn't allow the lost to come in?