ballen0351
Sr. Grandmaster
He didn't give them much time to pick a new one.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The election of a new Pope won't begin until he resigns. There can only be one Pope at a time. Pope Benedict XVI will leave Rome, and go to Castle Gandalfo during the Conclave, and they won't stop until they elect a Pope.
There are a lot of questions and wonderings about what will happen, since we haven't dealt with this in about 600 years. Things like will Pope Benedict's ring be smashed, where he might be buried when he does die, and so on...
Personally -- throughout his Pontificate he has indicated that if he was to become physically or otherwise unable to do the job of leading the Church, he would step down. While there was little warning, it didn't come out of the blue. One way I heard it put today was "stunned but not surprised", in that the timing caught everyone flatfooted, but the intimations and maybe the thought had been there.
Well there you go. I change my post to say at least its quick and he didn't drag it out.
I thought it was an early April fools....but it seems to be genuine Pope Benedict XVI. is calling it quits.
http://www.sullivanil.us/SYB/baseball.jpg
I don't think there has been a Pope leaving the job alive since....ever....at least not in modern times...
I'm not sure if you meant to include a link to a baseball jpeg in your post, but this sent me in to a fit of giggles when I saw it at work. The name Gil Santos won't mean much to anyone outside of Boston...he is a legendary sports broadcaster who just retired last month.
In the late 70s when the Boston Red Sox were in hot pursuit of their pennant, he shocked more than a few uptight suits when doing a quick drop saying "The Pope is dead, and the Sox are alive! Details at 11" :rofl: :rofl:
He's 85, he's served the church since he was ordained in 1951, SIXTY TWO YEARS ago. He's earned his retirement.
Not being Catholic, the above is my ONLY opinion on this.
The Prophecy of the Popes, attributed to Saint Malachy, is a list of 112 short phrases in Latin. They purport to describe each of the Roman Catholic popes (along with a few anti-popes), beginning with Pope Celestine II (elected in 1143) and concluding with current pope Benedict XVI's successor, a pope described in the prophecy as "Peter the Roman", whose pontificate will end in the destruction of the city of Rome.
Provenance
Final part of the Prophecy in Lignum Vitae (1595) p.311
The prophecy was first published in 1595 by Arnold de Wyon, a Benedictine historian, as part of his book Lignum VitƦ. Wyon attributed the list to Saint Malachy, the 12th‑century bishop of Armagh in Ireland. According to the traditional account, in 1139, Malachy was summoned to Rome by Pope Innocent II. While in Rome, Malachy purportedly experienced a vision of future popes, which he recorded as a sequence of cryptic phrases. This manuscript was then deposited in the Roman Archive, and thereafter forgotten about until its rediscovery in 1590.
On the other hand, Bernard of Clairvaux's biography of Malachy makes no mention of the prophecy, nor is it mentioned in any record prior to its 1595 publication.[1] Some sources, including the most recent editions of the Catholic Encyclopedia, suggest that the prophecy is a late 16th‑century forgery. Some have suggested that it was created by Nostradamus and was credited to Saint Malachy so the purported seer would not be blamed for the destruction of the papacy. Supporters, such as author John Hogue, who wrote a popular book titled The Last Pope about the claims, generally argue that, even if the author of the prophecies is uncertain, the predictions are still valid.
Position of the Church
The Church regards the prophesy as a forgery.[2] (Besides the evidence in the previous citation, many sceptics see further evidence for forgery in that, for some of the Popes prior to the list's 'rediscovery' in 1590, the prophecy is so 'appropriate' that it 'smacks of hindsight', and many critics 'see a falling off' thereafter, although 'some surprisingly appropriate phrases' are still found.)[3] The ambiguous symbolism of the Popes and fanatical interpretation thereof are regarded as divination and postdiction, respectively.[4] Since there is no moral certitude of the prophesy's authenticity, according to Normae Congregationis,[5] and since the prophesy is like the prophesies of Nostradamus, which is a sign of forgery,[6] the Prophecy of the Popes is not regarded as authentic by the Church.[7]
During the Papacy of Pius X (1903-1914), the Catholic Encyclopedia, while thinking the list likely to be forged but while also accepting its possible genuineness, reassuringly argued that, even if it was genuine prophecy, there might still be many Popes between the second last Pope on the list, Gloria olivae (who eventually turned out to be Benedict XVI (2005-2013)) and the final Pope on the list, Petrus Romanus.[8]
Anyone know where he's been? There have been a lot f threads lately where id be interested in his view on.I haven't seen Bill Mattocks around, but I'd be interested in hearing his read on this situation.
The new leader of the Palais-Royal group: Michel Camdessus, French economist and former Managing Director of the IMF. The group came to its conclusion. The report of the Palais-Royal Initiative, issued in January of 2011 (and revised the next month) calls for the creation of a supranational banking power, outside the control of any government, which would issue the global reserve currency in the form of SDRs, a unit of account created at Bretton Woods in 1944. Essentially, Camdessus’ old colleagues at the IMF (and the Bank of International Settlements) want to take over international finance
Cardinal Peter Turkson is president of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace. On October 23[SUP]rd[/SUP], 2011 (18 days after the G-20 presentation) the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace surprised many by coming out with a proposal that damned “the idolatry of the market” and called for a supranational banking authority identical to the one recommended by the Palais-Royal group.
Why is Pope Benedict XVI stepping down so unexpectedly? The answer is to be found, I believe, in the name of the man considered to have the best odds of being our next pope: Cardinal Peter Turkson. According to the Pope’s own brother, Benedict is tormented by the “Vatileaks” scandal, involving leaked Vatican documents indicating money laundering and corruption. This is not to say that Benedict himself is implicated, but he may well be resigning to protect the church, as acquiescence to someone’s threat to release more. Who would possess such documents? The financiers who are on the opposite side of the Vatican trades, naturally. Those financiers who want a new pope in power: Peter Turkson, who is fully on board, and who will declare the IMF schemes to be moral and just when the time comes, a man who is unassailable due to his skin color, who will be commanding the obedience of 1.2 billion Catholics.
Absolutely fascinating…
An interesting perspective: http://richardgleaves.blogspot.com/2013/02/a-trail-ofbreadcrumbs-resignation.html
Conspiracy theorists everywhere are blowing loads in their pants over this....LOL!
Popes don't just quit. I wonder if this is involved with all of the sex scandels? Didn't this Ratzinger help cover it up while part of the lower orders?
I always forget how uninformed people who post about the Church on this board generally are.
Especially the Catholics.
Reuters is saying that (unnamed) Vatican officials are in support of the decision for the Pope to remain at the Vatican for reasons of security and immunity.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/15/us-pope-resignation-immunity-idUSBRE91E0ZI20130215
In the comments, a person who identifies herself as a Catholic physician by the name of Dr. Rosemary Eileen McHugh of Chicago, has a rather different view of then Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger's involvement of the sex abuse crisis.