The College of Cardinals has selected a new pope. As of now, we don’t know who it is. Get your guesses in immediately and your comments in later. No rampant bigotry, please.
UPDATE: And the winner is: Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio of Buenos Aires, who is of Italian ancestry, and who becomes the first Jesuit pope of all time. He will adopt the name Francis I.
Here’s Sam Jones on Bergoglio:
The archbishop of Buenos Aires is a Jesuit intellectual who travels by bus and has a practical approach to poverty: when he was appointed a cardinal, Bergoglio persuaded hundreds of Argentinians not to fly to Rome to celebrate with him but instead to give the money they would have spent on plane tickets to the poor. He was a fierce opponent of Argentina’s decision to legalise gay marriage in 2010, arguing children need to have the right to be raised and educated by a father and a mother. He was created a cardinal by John Paul II on 21 February 2001.
From the Toronto Globe and Mail:
Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio
Bergoglio, 76, has spent nearly his entire career at home in Argentina, overseeing churches and shoe-leather priests. The archbishop of Buenos Aires reportedly got the second-most votes after Joseph Ratzinger in the 2005 papal election, and he has long specialized in the kind of pastoral work that some say is an essential skill for the next pope.
In a lifetime of teaching and leading priests in Latin America, which has the largest share of the world’s Catholics, Bergoglio has shown a keen political sensibility as well as the kind of self-effacing humility that fellow cardinals value highly. Bergoglio is known for modernizing an Argentine church that had been among the most conservative in Latin America.
UPDATE 2: I’m regarding myself somewhat in disbelief at being willing to comment on this at all, but: from the perspective of one who cares about the poor and hopes for some liberalization of church theology, at first blush this is probably just about the most welcome choice one could imagine and far better than one should have been able to expect.
Yes, people will jump immediately onto his being “a fierce opponent of Argentina’s decision to [legalize] gay marriage in 2010,” but that’s pretty much what you have to expect from a cardinal of any sort, let alone one with any hope of becoming Pope. Two things avout this strike me as especially significant:
(1) His position was not in response to something mild, like the mere existence of homosexuality, but in response to the strongest action that a country could take in this policy domain. In other words, he didn’t go out seeking the fight against a vulnerable enemy, like the rotters in Uganda who want to make homosexual activity a capital offense. He responded to a decisive victory for civil liberties and rights of gays and lesbians. That’s not good, in my book, but it’s not Rick Santorum-like. He’s entitled to his benighted opinion, and his opinion is not incompatible with coexistence with a “sinful” state.
(2) The argument he made against marriage equality was not, as one might have expected, that homosexuality was an abomination, “go read Leviticus,” etc., but that having parents of both genders is good for children. This explanation is notable for being (a) non-theological, (b) based on concern for the welfare of children, and (c) wrong — and, more and more, demonstrably wrong. You’re not going to find a Pope who’s going to have favored marriage equality. The next best thing is to find one who opposes on grounds that are scientifically debatable and that can be rebutted.
Some other points:
(1) The choice of an Argentine is, like it or not, a slap in the face at the extremely conservative insider from Brazil, Cardinal Scherer. Argentina and Brazil are very competitive. Now Latin America has the first non-European pope — and it’s from the smaller country with fewer Catholics.
(2) That he played any significant role in the liberalization of the Argentine clerical hierarchy, which was behind some awful practices during the “Dirty War,” is wonderful. That he’s apparently humble and pro-serving the poor just re-emphasizes that.
(3) The name “Francis”! No Pope has ever take the name of St. Francis of Assisi before now. I recall reading somewhere — I’ll go try to find the source — that this would be one of the hallmarks of a Pope who was truly devoted to serving the poor. He’s also the first-ever Jesuit, so this is also likely a nod towards the founder of that order, St. Francis Xavier, who among other things was a noted internationalist who established the Catholic Church in Goa, India.
(4) Apparently, he came in second in the voting when Cardinal Ratzinger was elevated to the papacy as Benedict XVI. Consider what this means: every single person who voted against Cardinal Ratzinger in 2005 voted for this man instead!
I’m not Catholic, though I’m married into a Catholic family and am still on great terms with my Catholic former in-laws, but to the extent I have the right to an opinion I’m very pleased with this choice. I welcome a Catholic Church that is devoted to ending poverty — as well as to ending the abuse of children. The world needs such leadership. I hope that he serves many years and appoints many like-minded Cardinals.
My guess is: the Brazilian with German roots, who will choose the name “Pius.”
Wouldn’t be surprised by the Milanese Scalo, either, in which case I’ll guess “Paul.”
Ah, the bossa nova Ratzinger. These guys remind me of the pre-Gorbachev Soviet Union, when they were giving each elderly reactionary the last few years of their lives to fuck things up even worse.
The odd thing, as I understand it, is that the Brazilian — OK, everyone get those jokes out of the way now — is the favorite of the “insider” faction and the Italian (Milanese) is the favorite of the “outsider” faction.
Sadly, I think that the prospect of getting a John XXIII-style reformer has been about equal to that of the Supervisors picking a Democrat as the new County Clerk.
We’ve had black smoke this week, and white smoke … and pink smoke!
http://feministing.com/2013/03/13/pink-smoke-released-over-vatican-protesting-lack-of-women-priests
If you keep hearing discussion of “the prophecies” and “Peter of Rome” and “the last Pope” and such, you can credit or blame St. Malachy, because this is what it’s about: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophecy_of_the_Popes
Sure that’s not St. Malarkey, of the Emerald Isle?
See, you’d know this stuff if you’d gone to a good high school!
AND THE WINNER IS: a longshot! Cardinal Bergoglio of Buenos Aires!
*Now everyone heard about the bird….the bird…bird.erd…the bird is wordl
Had picked by Jonathan Livingston Seagull…..how can it get any better than
that? But does he do the Samba? Francis…or Frank ….or whatever he
wants to be called.
* a most excellent Winship comment!
From the UK’s The Guardian, quoting someone named Sam Jones:
The archbishop of Buenos Aires is a Jesuit intellectual who travels by bus and has a practical approach to poverty: when he was appointed a cardinal, Bergoglio persuaded hundreds of Argentinians not to fly to Rome to celebrate with him but instead to give the money they would have spent on plane tickets to the poor. He was a fierce opponent of Argentina’s decision to legalise gay marriage in 2010, arguing children need to have the right to be raised and educated by a father and a mother. He was created a cardinal by John Paul II on 21 February 2001.
Jorge Mario Bergoglio of Buenos Aires, who is of Italian ancestry, is the first Jesuit pope of all time.
So what side was Pope Francis on during the Falklands Island war with Britain?
Seems like a nice one……..though. Will be interesting to see when he will go to London and meet with the Queen.
Much more important than that is what did he do during Argentina’s long Dirty War on its own citizens, before that?
check….
there, time stamp fixed!!
I had to tell WordPress that we’re in mountain time though, not sure the correct way to do this…
So far as I can tell: he mostly laid low and tried to stay out of politics. He complied with demands from the junta in some cases, notably temporarily housing some prisoners in his vacation house “El Silencio” when international human rights workers came calling. There is no indication of what leniency he bought with that, or what duress he may have faced in doing so. (Americans don’t have much experience with dealing with an actual brutal and murderous junta, much as we like to pretend otherwise, making it very easy to condemn those who, for example, compromise with power not to save their own necks but to save those of others who might be threatened to force the leader’s compliance.)
He also withdrew protection from two priests who, after ignoring warnings from the junta, continued to do (admirable) political work in one of the nation’s slums. They were kidnapped by the junta and tortured. Much later it came out that he had intervened delicately by having a priest close to the junta leader seek their relief — and they were released alive (and later slammed the now-Pope for having withdrawn his support.) This event reminds me of various situations I saw within Occupy where people would commit a brave but foolhardy act of resistance — though against no power within an order of magnitude of the Argentine junta — against my or others advice, get arrested and such, and then complain that we attorneys weren’t doing all we could to raise bail and get them out of jail and drop everything and defend them for free.
Trying to guide one’s flock through its dealings with a murderous regime — one that we supported, by the way, although you didn’t see a lot of people here self-immolating on the steps of the Capitol Building in protest of it — is a difficult and horrific business. It would be nice if someone from the equivalent of the Nazi-era “White Rose” resistance movement were elected Pope. Unfortunately, they were killed, and so ineligible for the papacy.
While I do want to see as full of an accounting as possible of his actions during the Dirty War, I’m not impressed with slams on this Pope for his complicity with commands under probable duress. Frankly, most of us do the same. And given the brutality of the Argentine regime, they were probably not threatening him with martyrdom a la Bishop Romero — a fairly easy decision to make — but with widespread terror against Catholics in the slums of Argentina (to be blamed on “Marxist revolutionaries,” of course.) Having lived through the terrible moral ambiguity of such a situation may perhaps make him a better spiritual leader; I hope that he will tell us more about it.
“It would be nice if someone from the equivalent of the Nazi-era “White Rose” resistance movement were elected Pope. Unfortunately, they were killed, and so ineligible for the papacy.”
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/rose.html
The story of the “White Rose” resistance is touching and tragic – and a story of heroic courage.
How the Hell did the Catholic Church become so powerful??? Why are people such sheep? Who is going to do something about all these creeps molesting Kids???? I just don’t understand why people are so gullible! New Pope….who the Hell cares???? No wonder we are in such a mess…people are S-T-U-P-I-D!!!
Nothing like calling Catholics stupid while using twelve question marks and three exclamation points in six sentences.
Incorrect grammar is not a sin.
Raping little boys is.
The church is full of hypocrites.
Indeed. Clearly grounds for calling a billion people stupid.
While you’re counting question marks, your church is destroying itself.
Who said it was my Church?
Upon further review, let’s stick with the theme here.
Who said it was my church?!?!?!?!
Ryan, why do you always wanna insult Inge and get Demagogue all upset?
Ah, assign blame how you’d like, Mr. Nelson. You and I can chat about that offline if it’s something you’d really like an answer to.
Re: Ms. Inge, that wasn’t meant to be an insult– but rather an observation of irony. Take it how you will. I hope it’s with more of light heart than mean intent, but I own the later if that’s how you choose to interpret it.
Ryan has posted here before that he was brought up Catholic, and as far as I know he has never announced his retirement. That’s what he told us, when GD thought that he had a Jewish name.
Not many people defending the Catholic faith these days, especially non-Catholics.
I think it’s a good step to elect a non-European to wear the miter. It only took 1200 years.
*As you may have noticed…..the American and British Cardinals were all passed over……as usual. Their story must be very deep….very deep….Sandusky like perhaps? Note: Only one ? Mark Dr. Ryan!
Actually, that was exactly like calling Catholics stupid while using twelve question marks and three exclamation points in six sentences.
Great. Another “doctrinal conservative,” whose main claim to fame was fighting tooth and nail against Argentina’s legalization of gay marriage. Now he can stand astride history yelling “stop!” on a world stage. I’m not seeing much hope for any progress in the church under this cat.
He claimed that allowing same-sex marriage was a violation of children’s “civil rights,” because they all need to have a mom and dad. As though suddenly not allowing gays to marry each other would give every kid a mom and dad. You think he gets similarly exercised over the civil rights violation of kids getting diddled by a priest? hope so, kinda doubt it.
Supposedly he’s very “humble” and cares a lot about poverty. I like there finally being a Pope Francis. But St Francis of Assisi (if that’s the one he’s thinking of) was a rebel. (I picked Francis as a confirmation name myself so I could switch between Assisi, Xavier and DeSales depending on the circumstances.)
Hey, wasn’t there a great white New York rapper called Pope Francis?
… No, that was SAGE FRANCIS. He did the best post-9/11 rap piece ever, “Makeshift Patriot.” Just a few days after the event. He was there. This recording includes sound from the immediate aftermath. THIS guy shoulda been Pope.
Oh, I see Diamond is adding some of this to the post.
Inge, since you asked, the Collective Hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church became so powerful by: demanding absolute loyalty within the clerical state; creating one of the best systems of educational institutions in the world, and making available to each of it clerics the best education they could handle; writing/assembling a world wide best seller that promises the reader a path to eternal life; creating a universal set of laws and consolidating all of its global executive, legislative, and judicial power into a single individual, and vesting that same power locally in single individuals who swear, and live a life of, obediance to the global leader; having institutional longevity; playing a major role in the development of theology, philosophy and every other area of intellectual life; amassing wealth, including coin, real prpoerty, and other tangible things; giving aid and comfort to the powerful regardless of their conduct; appointing its most fervent agents as the executives of major corporations in every geographic region on the planet; lobbying; obtaining government contracts; conducting massive numbers of public “good works;” soliciting sustaining donors multiple times per week; holding open meetings of the general membership of its organization – and preaching out its propaganda from theology, to world events, to national events, to local events from a pulpit; organizing from the grassroots to the boardroom; manipulating local law regarding incorporation and nonprofit activity; running one of the largest public relations operations in the world; lying; stealing; retaining world class lawyers; committing high crimes and misdemeanors, including global conspiracies to avoid civil and criminal justice; setting its clerics apart from society; claiming and exercising power in the name of God; scaring the hell out of – and sometimes into – people; appealing to what is best about people; living off the postmortem reputation of a God that had become man – Emmanuel — that paid with his blood for every single thing anyone ever did wrong; running a corrupt banking system; publically and privately pursuing a global yet highly localized: social, political, and economic agenda with complete abandon; placing its reputation and its need to avoid the appearance of scandal before truth and transparency; and, occupying all of the leadership roles in the largest membership organization in the world. That is how it all happened Inge.
Now, Inge, the Collective Hierarchy is not the Roman Catholic Church, they are but one branch or face of the institution. There are good men and women in the Roman Catholic Church – some of them are clerics, some have risen to become bishops – who faithfully follow the path set out by Christ. I know many of these Christans in the Roman Catholic Church, and they are a blessing.
Inge has a nasty habit of letting her biases smear vast numbers of people with over-generalized insults. Nuance, balance and fairness aren’t exactly her strong suits.
I was cracking up as I read this, Mike, because I imagined you standing up and saying it extemporaneously in a single breath. (You left out bingo, though.) Thanks for offering a comment worthy of the canons — and congratulations on the new pontiff.
Bingo, how in the world did I miss bingo. Bingo gets more of the excommunicated back into a church owned building than any another event in Roman Catholic Church in America. Bingo — or the liquor and smoke filled hall — is also the cause of many a mortal sin. So, its a mixed blessing, but danger be damned, its a money maker.
On a more somber note, I feel your frustration Inge. The Roman Catholic Church in America was one of the primary institutions in my formation during childhood and young adult life. I feel betrayed by men I trusted — men who ran the world I grew up in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia — who despite the trust we placed in them sent 3 pedophiles into my home town (even two at the same time), who abused my neighbors and friends. People are doing something about it Inge. Grand juries have been convened; civil lawsuits have provided some remedies; records have been ripped free from their hiding places; Evil — proper noun intended — has been exposed and in many places is on the run; a few heroes from within the clergy have left very dark-side jobs and served as experts in grand jury proceedings and in criminal and civil courts; people all across the nation are calling for reform of statutes of limitations so that these cases can be pursued, and legislatures are slowly responding. The laity has become organized, and they are not backing down. As I write this there is a battle for statute of limiations reform underway in the Pennsylvania Legislature, with young law students traveling down from New York’s Cardoza Law School serving as the metophorical infantrymen. There is action on the statute of limitations here in our own state that should soon blossom. The tide may turn Inge, I just pray that public interest does not get too fatigued. There is lots to do, and this movement for justice — the elimination of all forms of abuse –needs more people in the fray.
Greg, thank you for your thoughtful reflections on the events of today and the congratulations on the new pontiff.
I am a lapsed Catholic and I know it will be hard for the church to reverse itself on attitudes on contraception and LGBT equality. I know they will never endorse abortion, but expecting them to have a pride parade in Vatican City would be allowing non Muslims in Mecca and Medina.
I hope the new pope tries to live a modest yet quality life reaching out to more people around the world.
Damn there’s a lot of us “lapsed Catholics” here. That IS the term of art, by the way. That’s how the Catholic church can claim so many members, they count all of us who were born into it and left. We’re just poor little lost lambs. Of course we DO tend to pay a lot of attention to our old Church as well, whether in anger or apologetics.
Diamond said: “The name “Francis” .. would be one of the hallmarks of a Pope who was truly devoted to serving the poor.” – also – “he’s apparently humble and pro-serving the poor ..”
Rev. Sirico said. “.. he combines concern for the poor with an insistence that it’s not the Church’s responsibility to be a political actor or to prescribe precise solutions to economic problems.”
Don’t get your hopes up Diamond – it is better to give to the poor from the heart (if even prompted by tax deductions) rather than by government confiscation and re-distribution.
Too late, skally; my hopes are already up. He’s also anti-austerity. Read Andrew Sullivan’s blog today: http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/03/13/live-blogging-pope-francis/. Quite interesting.
Another link on the views, and record, of formerly Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio of Buenos Aires: social conservative, accused by human rights lawyers, and opponent of austerity programs :
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/03/13/everything-you-need-to-know-about-pope-franciss-macroeconomic-views/
Count me as another member of the Lapsed Catholic Club, although I am still actively and joyfully a member of another denomination. I doubt we’ll ever see a Pope who embraces or accepts gay marriage or other “non-traditional” family arrangements, at least not in our generation. And that’s fine. As the spiritual leader of a religious organization whose stated policies have always been dead set against these issues, it should come as no surprise. However, we can hope he recognizes and articulates the difference between a religious belief and civil rights. Outside of its religious trappings, marriage is a state-approved agreement between two people that give them certain rights to each others’ and joint ownership of property. The state can define that relationship in any terms it sees fit, including the union of same-sex couples. When California gave tentative approval to gay marriage in the pre-Prop 8 days, one of the people at my church was railing against it after services. Another parishioner put it in the perfect context: “I expect my church to be Christian but not my government”.
I firmly believe gay and transgendered people should have the right to marry, and do so in a church if they so desire. But we’ll never–nor should we try to–force any church to accept what it doesn’t believe to be consistent with its world view. The loathsome creatures from Westboro Church are beneath contempt and insult true Christians. But we have no more right to shut them up than we do to tell the Roman Catholic Church to recognize what it can’t accept. We can pray that one day they’ll see the light, but that’s a dim possibility at this time.
I do hope this Pope lives up to his reputation for advocating social justice, an area where church doctrine and public policy can go hand-in-hand.
Huff Po thinks the new pope’s doppelganger is Jeffrey Tambor.
I’m thinking he has more of a Woody Allen look.
Your thoughts?
Eyore
Also, hate to nitpick, but the Pope heads the Roman Catholic Church–not the Catholic Church. There are several “catholic” churches, the root word of which is Latin for “universal”. Nealy all Episcopal churches pray the Nicene Creed, which includes a prayer for the “holy catholic and apostolic church.” (note catholic with a lower-case “c”). Many traditional Anglican churches define themselves as Anglo-Catholic, and many national churches in Eastern Europe use the word in their titles as well. The Roman Church is certainly the largest, and may, debatably, be the first Christian church, but it sure isn’t the only Catholic Church.
Heads up, the Pope is also head of some of those Eastern churches . . . Byzantine Catholic for one.
Broader point accepted, just food for thought.
Point taken and agreed with, Ryan. But also note the Roman Church is not the only one with a Pope, re: Coptic Church on Egypt, whose members beleive their Pope comes from a line originated by the Apostle Mark rather than Peter.