Pope Benedict XVI 'is to resign'

[alfred russel]

I gotta say that if you don't believe in the resurrection of Christ you can hardly call yourself a christian today.

I disagree. Many progressive christians are focusing more on the underlying message of Jesus (rather than the rest of the Bible) and putting aside the miracles, etc. When Rowan Williams was archbishop of canterbury he came under criticism by some senior members of the church for holding onto the specific belief in teh resurrection.

It seems that the words progressive, moderate and anglican are merely euphemisms for non-belief these days.

But on Williams

John Shelby Spong once accused Williams of being a 'neo-medievalist', preaching orthodoxy to the people in the pew but knowing in private that it is not true.[27] In an interview with Third Way Magazine Williams responded: "I am genuinely a lot more conservative than he would like me to be. Take the Resurrection. I think he has said that of course I know what all the reputable scholars think on the subject and therefore when I talk about the risen body I must mean something other than the empty tomb. But I don't. I don't know how to persuade him, but I really don't."[28]

He was criticized for hypocracy, in preaching one thing and believing another. His response was that he believed in the resurrection despite the rumors to the contrary.

Actual Christ Followers (those who deny the divinty of but advocate the philosophy of) Jesus Christ are unfortunately few and far between since apart from the nice stuff he says he is a millennial end of days prophet.

According to a quick google search, the guy you quote (spong) is a retired bishop and current theologian who does not believe in the resurrection.

You can assert that means he is not a christian, but when you start declaring senior clergy in established churches to be non christian I tend toward the view your definition is too narrow.

[Iormlund]

I wouldn't rule out voting for somebody who's religious provided he could explain his beliefs in a coherent, rational and reasonable manner.

Sadly, I don't think I'll ever have the chance of voting for someone who can explain anything in a coherent, rational and reasonable manner.

[CountDeMoney]

It took them 500 years t put non-Italians on the chair, so I think a non-European is at least another 500 years off.

This.  The Home Office in Rome isn't known for its progressive thinking, thanks to the stamp JP2 put on it.

Oullet sounds intriguing, apparently fluent in several languages and quite impressive intellectually, but I just don't see a non-European pontiff considering the sheer number of votes they have.  My money's on Schonborn in Vienna, he's relatively young at 68 and a conservative.

Then again, wasn't that long ago I thought I'd never see a black President in my lifetime, either.  So who the hell knows.

LONDON — Bookmakers have been quick to offer odds on candidates to replace Pope Benedict XVI, with cardinals from Ghana, Nigeria and Canada among the early favorites.

Ghana's Cardinal Peter Turkson, Canada's Cardinal Marc Ouellet and Cardinal Francis Arinze of Nigeria lead in betting with Britain's major bookmakers.

William Hill made Turkson — one of the highest-ranking African cardinals at the Vatican — its 3/1 favorite Monday, followed by Ouellet at 7/2 and Arinze at 4/1. Ladbrokes also had Turkson as favorite, followed by Arinze and Ouellet.

Ireland's Paddy Power also offered short odds on the three, as well as long odds on unlikely candidates — including U2 singer Bono at 1,000/1. It also offered 1,000/1 odds on Father Dougal Maguire, the simpleminded fictional priest from 1990s U.K. sitcom "Father Ted", and installed Richard Dawkins at "666/1".

The Center for Constitutional Rights, which is pursuing a case against the pope and other Vatican leaders on behalf of victims of sexual abuse in the international criminal court, said that Pope Benedict's resignation will make international prosecution easier.

  Good luck with that.  Maybe they can grab him during the same dragnet they get Kissinger and Cheney.

[Valmy]

I wouldn't rule out voting for somebody who's religious provided he could explain his beliefs in a coherent, rational and reasonable manner.

Sadly, I don't think I'll ever have the chance of voting for someone who can explain anything in a coherent, rational and reasonable manner.

Yeah I was about to say that that is a pretty high bar for a politician.

[Viking]

I wouldn't rule out voting for somebody who's religious provided he could explain his beliefs in a coherent, rational and reasonable manner.

Sadly, I don't think I'll ever have the chance of voting for someone who can explain anything in a coherent, rational and reasonable manner.

You're Spanish right?

[Iormlund]

Yeah. Out politicians can't even lie properly. Look at this hilarious .gif of our beloved President right when he tells the nation he's never received any bribe money. Hint: left eye.

[Viking]

The issue in my mind is not the one of religion or not-religion but rather the issue of intellectual honesty. I can't trust a man who picks a-la-carte from a religious text. If he can explain to me how he decides which bits are relevant and how they will affect his policy then I'll be able to judge him on his policy. If he merely throws up nebulous obfuscation then I can't trust him.

[Valmy]

The issue in my mind is not the one of religion or not-religion but rather the issue of intellectual honesty. I can't trust a man who picks a-la-carte from a religious text. If he can explain to me how he decides which bits are relevant and how they will affect his policy then I'll be able to judge him on his policy. If he merely throws up nebulous obfuscation then I can't trust him.

You are too much dude.

[Josephus]

I gotta say that if you don't believe in the resurrection of Christ you can hardly call yourself a christian today.

I disagree. Many progressive christians are focusing more on the underlying message of Jesus (rather than the rest of the Bible) and putting aside the miracles, etc. When Rowan Williams was archbishop of canterbury he came under criticism by some senior members of the church for holding onto the specific belief in teh resurrection.

And that's fine as a way of life. But it's not exactly Christianity, and, most importantly, it's not CAtholicism. My earlier point was you're welcome to believe that Christ wasn't the Son of God, didn't resurrect from the dead, and that gay sex is cool. But you can't be Catholic at the same time.

[Caliga]

So anyway, will he go back to being Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger?  Will he be Pontifex Emeritus?

[Caliga]

Yeah. Out politicians can't even lie properly. Look at this hilarious .gif of our beloved President right when he tells the nation he's never received any bribe money. Hint: left eye.

Hey neat, the President of Spain looks like my Dad.

[MadImmortalMan]

So anyway, will he go back to being Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger?  Will he be Pontifex Emeritus?

Censor? 

[Barrister]

So anyway, will he go back to being Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger?  Will he be Pontifex Emeritus?

Last papal resignation was 600 years ago, so not a lot of precedent.

Apparently Gregory XII did continue to be called by his papal name.  He will continue to be a bishop, and could theoretically be appointed a cardinal by his successor.

[Viking]

So anyway, will he go back to being Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger?  Will he be Pontifex Emeritus?

Lepidus disapproves of Ratzinger. A Pontificate is for life (one does not abandon it). A Pontificate is holy (Augustus doesn't assassinate pontiffs).

[Caliga]

Apparently Gregory XII did continue to be called by his papal name.  He will continue to be a bishop, and could theoretically be appointed a cardinal by his successor.

If Ratzinger was younger, could the Conclave elect him again?