Pope Benedict XVI 'is to resign'

[Barrister]

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?

Yes, but since one can turn down an election, you hardly see why they'd bother to do so.

[Caliga]

Because it'd be funny?  Come on, we're talking about a bunch of bored old closeted homos here.

[Caliga]

Anyway, I'm amused by all of the editorials (CNN, BBC, etc.) I've seen saying he was a disappointing Pope.  How does one be a non-disappointing Pope anymore?  Wave a magic wand and make the pedophiles vanish?

[alfred russel]

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.

That is because several christian sects, notably including Catholicism, have been quite inflexible regarding doctrine and prone to expel people for deviations from orthodoxy. There are historical reasons for that. But it doesn't have to be that way.

[fhdz]

In what sense?  Unless somebody is super religious, like old school Fahdiz, I do not really think we do this.

Good times.

[CountDeMoney]

Anyway, I'm amused by all of the editorials (CNN, BBC, etc.) I've seen saying he was a disappointing Pope.  How does one be a non-disappointing Pope anymore?  Wave a magic wand and make the pedophiles vanish?

The conventional wisdom was that he was only going to be a placeholder Pope to begin with, the kind that allowed the JP2 era to cement and provide a bridge before the big vote for the the Next Big Pope(tm) that would be around for decades.  The fact that he was actually more activist than expected is a credit to him, as he could've just mailed it in.

[Caliga]

I think it's cool that he resigned and kudos to him for doing that if he felt like he couldn't continue (assuming like I said earlier this isn't due to some scandal).

[fhdz]

I can't trust a man who picks a-la-carte from a religious text.

That's one of the silliest bars to trust I've ever heard someone espouse.

[alfred russel]

Anyway, I'm amused by all of the editorials (CNN, BBC, etc.) I've seen saying he was a disappointing Pope.  How does one be a non-disappointing Pope anymore?  Wave a magic wand and make the pedophiles vanish?

The conventional wisdom was that he was only going to be a placeholder Pope to begin with, the kind that allowed the JP2 era to cement and provide a bridge before the big vote for the the Next Big Pope(tm) that would be around for decades.  The fact that he was actually more activist than expected is a credit to him, as he could've just mailed it in.

Actually, this is probably an extremely positive precedent for the church. For 2000 years, people who get really sick or old, die. Now they can go on life support. In an Ariel Sharon type situation the church would be screwed. Appointing really old guys to rule until they die is not a good management strategy.

[Viking]

I can't trust a man who picks a-la-carte from a religious text.

That's one of the silliest bars to trust I've ever heard someone espouse.

It's not a bar for trust. It is a condition which necessitates mistrust. You've got it the wrong way round.

[fhdz]

It's not a bar for trust. It is a condition which necessitates mistrust. You've got it the wrong way round.

Those are functionally equivalent, and equally silly.

[Josephus]

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?

Only if the Holy Spirit guides them to.

[The Minsky Moment]

I also continue to be baffled by Viking's apparent preference for internally consistent catastrophic error over logically inconsistent muddling.

[mongers]

I also continue to be baffled by Viking's apparent preference for internally consistent catastrophic error over logically inconsistent muddling.

His dictionary is missing the pages between praetor and prairie ?

[Sheilbh]

Catholicism has shown that it can be endlessly flexible.  There's the theology and doctrine, of course (and by the way the evangelicals do have those as well), but there's also how it is presented.

I don't think the RCC will get more adherents by being more liberal is all I'm saying.

Indeed. I think it does as an 'eternal' counter-culture. The most popular and fastest growing churches in the UK, especially for converts, are the more conservative Latin mass style ones. Most cradle Catholics'll go anywhere but there's a growing number of people who take the whole liturgy (Benedict's real conservatism was felt here) very seriously and they're not liberal. The Economist did a story on the UK surge of traditionalists recently.

The only big issue I think most Catholics would entirely disagree with the Church on is contraception, which is also an area that the Church was internally divided on. Doctrine and other social teachings have broad support.

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.

I think the last bit's right. Who knows? The Conclave's historically tended to be surprising. One of Benedict's lesser known changes was, I believe, that he removed JPII's reforms to the Conclave.

The reforms meant that after a set period of time the Conclave would no longer need a 2/3 majority, rather just a simple majority. Obviously there's a huge number of potential problems with that and it's an interesting possibility that it could've helped in Ratzinger's speedy election. But I think that's gone and we're back to 2/3 majority.

The conventional wisdom was that he was only going to be a placeholder Pope to begin with, the kind that allowed the JP2 era to cement and provide a bridge before the big vote for the the Next Big Pope(tm) that would be around for decades.  The fact that he was actually more activist than expected is a credit to him, as he could've just mailed it in.

Ironically, given the attacks he gets by bien pensant pundits in the media, he downplayed the culture war far more than JP. He was more about things like liturgical reform and actual theology. I think he was a quietly impressive Pope who'll end up, historically, getting far more respect than he currently has. But I think you're right the next one could be big - not least because electing a 65 year old isn't necessarily a big deal now there's a precedent for a Pope stepping down.