54

Habemus Papam!

 

Live Feed:

 

White Smoke is blowing from the Vatican’s chimney. We will know the identity of the new Pope shortly.

Update 2:40: No announcement yet, but it should be coming shortly. I just have to say as someone who couldn’t watch eight years ago, this is awesome.

Update 3:00: Thomas Peters has linked to this handy dandy list of the Cardinals’ names in Latin, so you will know who the new Pope is approximately three seconds sooner.

Update 3:12: It’s Cardinal Bergoglio of Argentina, and he has chosen the name Francis.

Update 3:49: John Allen had written a profile of Cardinal Bergoglio, now Pope Francis I, a week ago. H/t: Dale Price. Reading some of the critical comments at the Reporter fills me with great hope.

Share With Friends
  •  
  • 8
  • 3
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    11
    Shares

Dante alighieri

54 Comments

  1. I go to bankruptcy court and they elect a Pope. It appears to be a good, solid choice. He is doctrinally orthodox. Appears to have opposed Liberation Theology. The fact that he is the first Jesuit Pope should have the conspiracy theorists howling at the moon tonight!

    Third non-Italian Pope in a row and the first Pope from the Western Hemisphere.

  2. Third non-Italian Pope in a row

    Ahh, but he is a child of Italian immigrants, so he’s Italian in the way that I am. (Well, I have to go further back in my ancestry than he does.)

  3. A good choice – who doubted that the Holy Spirit would give us a good man.
    I pray that he takes up from where Benedict left off and continues to clean out the rot in some areas of the Church – starting with CINO politicians and dissident clerics.

  4. I was reading the comments at Rorate Caeli. Most of them are complaining or griping, because Summorum Pontificum is apparently nonexistent in the Archdiocese of Buenos Aires.

    At any rate, the Latin Mass (Extraordinary Form) is not going away. No Pope will dare to suppress it. It is just that the Church in Latin America has long been – well, cursed with liberation theology and the Latin Mass is not all that prevalent there anyway.

  5. Another brief profile of him here. People will be encouraged by this:

    In the document, the new Pope referred to abortion and communion, saying “we should commit ourselves to ‘eucharistic coherence’, that is, we should be conscious that people cannot receive holy communion and at the same time act or speak against the commandments, in particular when abortion, euthanasia, and other serious crimes against life and family are facilitated. This responsibility applies particularly to legislators, governors, and health professionals.”

  6. read a couple-year old article someone linked alleging that Bergoglio helped the Argentine military junta hide political prisoners from a human rights delegation during the Dirty War (somehow i have doubts about the accuracy of these claims, call me jaded.) wondering if this is gonna become the new “Ratzinger was a Nazi!” claim for anti-Catholics

  7. ” Reading some of the critical comments at the Reporter fills me with great hope.”

    Me too, me too!

    Viva El Papa!

  8. I’m disappointed because I wanted Cardinal Raymond Burke, but God’s will be done. The opening antiphon of today’s evening prayer is: “Lord, how wonderful is your wisdom, so far beyond my understanding.” Jesus, we trust in you!

  9. …fills me with great hope…
    They all (ok most) seem fine at first. But, there has been so much bad with anything involving an “election” lately that I’ve become doubtful of all things. I had a bad year personally too, which doesn’t help my attitude either. When I heard Francis I is a Jesuit, I had to catch my breath. After the rotten things America Magazine has said lately, I wonder how they’ll welcome their brother SJ.

    I apologize, but thank you for letting me get that off my chest.

    BTW…I encourage all to complete novenas begun for the conclave. (I think I’m on day 3 of one to St. Joseph). God is not limited by time, and 9 days is 9 days.

  10. Rorate Caeli comments are having a meltdown.

    According to the comments, he suppresses the Latin Mass and refuses to wear cassocks.

    It’s a wait and see, especially on the TLM.

    He is a great pick though! Brilliant.

  11. Well, I’m a crusty, bitter rad-trad. I don’t want to poop on the party or rain on the parade.

    On the one hand, he’s engaged in the sort of false ecumenism condemned in Mortalium Animos and hasn’t been much of a friend to the Latin Mass.

    On the other hand, it could have been worse. And at least he’s made strong statements on the natural law, on abortion and marriage. I’m sure he’ll hold the line on the male priesthood and celibacy as well.

    I’m not a popeolatrist. Popes come and go. The Papacy has had violent murderers, fornicators, homosexuals, and private heretics. I know some excellent traditional priests my age; if they are representative of their generation, perhaps one day we will have a no-nonsense pope again. One can pray.

    Nothing can drive me away from the traditional Mass or the traditional faith in the meantime.

  12. I confess, when I heard “Jesuit” my heart sank. But I’ve liked everything I’ve heard and read about him.

    In other news, the NY Times is pained that the Pope is still Catholic.

  13. A few thoughts:

    For those of you concerned about Pope Francis’ Jesuit affiliation, the EWTN commentary I heard this afternoon indicated that he was NOT exactly popular with others in his order because he was “too orthodox.” In fact he was relegated to teaching high school chemistry for some years, until Pope John Paul II made him a bishop and later, a cardinal.

    Also, the common assumption seems to be that his papal name is in honor of St. Francis of Assisi; but it could also be in honor of St. Francis Xavier, a great Jesuit missionary, or even St. Francis Borgia, another Jesuit saint.

    Although Cardinal Bergoglio/Francis I has been described as a “surprise” choice (he certainly was to me), if he was indeed the runner-up to Cardinal Ratzinger/Benedict XVI last time around — which I did not know until today — he shouldn’t have been.

    Finally, I am not terribly surprised that some (by no means all) of the rad-trad crowd are having meltdowns. They were hoping for someone who would, perhaps, confirm their vision of a “purified”, lean-and-mean Church comprised only of the firmly committed. Pope Francis clearly does not share that vision of the Church, from what I have seen, though he does not hesistate to proclaim truths of the faith uncomfortable to both liberals and conservatives. If he’s getting it from both sides, he must be doing something right, I say!

  14. “On the one hand, he’s engaged in the sort of false ecumenism condemned in Mortalium Animos and hasn’t been much of a friend to the Latin Mass.”

    How so?

    Rad-trads can at least take some heart in the fact that he LOOKS a bit like Pius XII with his round glasses and all. Other than the papabile profile by John Allen prior to the conclave, I know little to nothing about him. We’ll find out in due course I’m sure.

  15. “The fact that he is the first Jesuit Pope should have the conspiracy theorists howling at the moon tonight!”

    Yeah, I was listening to Coast to Coast (formerly the Art Bell show. It’s BS but very entertaining sometimes) and the moonbats are already doing the flybys.

    Are you going to bankrupcy court for yourself or a client, Donald?

  16. Yeah, I was listening to Coast to Coast (formerly the Art Bell show. It’s BS but very entertaining sometimes) and the moonbats are already doing the flybys

    Wait, what? It doesn’t start for another hour– I often listen to the home station! (90% BS, but mostly interesting. Sometimes folks who simply are to un-PC get invited on, like Wesley J. Smith, one of the handful of ‘bioethicists’ that doesn’t spend all his time explaining why it’s OK to violate basic ethics.
    Or did someone pop for that early freebie thing? Or you caught last night’s show? (I vaguely remember someone hopping on to talk about how Peter II would be elected or something.)

  17. Well, it sounded like Coast to Coast because they were already in spin mode because the neither the new pope’s given name or papal name was even close to Peter as per St. Malachy’s alleged prophecy. Coast to Coast is the only radio show around here that even gets into that kind of stuff.

  18. “How so?”

    Others have already mentioned the Latin Mass thing. Maybe it is just a regional issue in that case.

    As for the false ecumenism:

    Exhibit 1:

    “”He lit a candle on the menorah, attended a Buenos Aires synagogue for Slichot, a pre-Rosh Hashana service, the Jewish New Year, as well as a commemoration of Kristallnacht, the wave of violent Nazi attacks against Jews before World War II,” Foxman said.”

    http://www.jpost.com/JewishWorld/JewishNews/Article.aspx?id=306351

    The last one isn’t a problem, but the first two are.

    Exhibit 2:

    http://www.traditioninaction.org/RevolutionPhotos/A306rcBergoglioBless.html

    “The highlight of the meeting was when the Argentine Cardinal fell to his knees to be blessed by the some twenty Protestant pastors present. ”

    This is unacceptable. But it is also par for the course since 1958. I’m not surprised or shocked. This is where we are. As long as we have good priests who proclaim the traditional faith, I have hope for the future. And we do.

  19. Well, it sounded like Coast to Coast because they were already in spin mode because the neither the new pope’s given name or papal name was even close to Peter as per St. Malachy’s alleged prophecy.

    The pathetic knockoff of Coast to Coast– “Ground Zero,” no link– was doing it, too. Mangling stuff so bad that I had to turn it off… if you’re going to spread conspiracy theories, can’t you at least get them right? “The Benedictines are the glory of the olive branch because they make peace” isn’t the setup– it doesn’t even make sense with the supposed title– the claim goes that because B16 is associated with the Mount of Olives and is cool he is the “glory of the olives.”
    And, of course, quoting as gospel truth the rumors I’ve heard that the Pope was accused of knowing about folks disappearing during their civil war.

    It’s worse than some of the Cryptozoology and Skeptics podcasts. (Yet I keep trying it, because the other radio shows this time of day are all just as bad.)

  20. “Are you going to bankrupcy court for yourself or a client, Donald?”

    If I were going to bankruptcy court for myself Greg, rest assured that I would not be wasting my time blogging! 🙂

    About 25% of my practice is bankruptcy and I represent both debtors and creditors. I frequently go to bankruptcy court, actually 341 meetings of creditors, on Wednesdays.

  21. “In other news, the NY Times is pained that the Pope is still Catholic.” 🙂

    Future New York Times Headline:
    Judgment Day: Christ Has Returned and is Catholic!
    New York Times Hardest Hit!

  22. Pressing question re Pope Francis: Since he is less of a liturgical and sartorial traditionalist than Benedict will he keep the red shoes and all the “fancy” vestments BXIV brought back into circulation? Church fashion not getting enough press coverage.

  23. I was reading the comments at Rorate Caeli. Most of them are complaining or griping,

    I knew there was a reason I stopped reading that blog.

    Also, the common assumption seems to be that his papal name is in honor of St. Francis of Assisi;

    I believe it was confirmed that he indeed took the name in honor of St. Francis of Assisi.

  24. Father Z said something along the lines of can we perhaps go one day without attacking the new Holy Father? I totally agree. My own thoughts would be that we get a conservative Jesuit and this is the reaction we get? Now, I realize these are just a few people, but even one is just plain sad. I just have to shake my head that any orthodox minded Catholic website would put up criticisms of the Holy Father before he even gave his first Benediction. I just can’t get into the head of someone whose first thought on hearing about the new pontiff is to put up laundry lists of things he onetime said or did that they don’t think is correct. I am sure we would all hate for someone to bring up everything we said or did at one time in our lives that may not today seem so profound.

    Honestly, their actions smack of disbelief. I have done some stupid things in my life, but telling the Holy Spirit he was wrong is not one of them.

  25. ” I just have to shake my head that any orthodox minded Catholic website would put up criticisms of the Holy Father before he even gave his first Benediction.”

    We live in an age of widespread apostasy and sacrilege, arguably exacerbated and even encouraged – perhaps unwittingly – by a council and a radical reorientation of the Church by a series of popes thinking in a similar way.

    It is OUR DUTY to be skeptical, critical, and cautious given the times in which we live and the precedents which have been set. Ideally we can be respectful as well. But never forget that there have been horrible popes who have injured the Church. The Holy Ghost protects the seat from officially promulgating error, but there is nothing to suggest that it personally and directly picks the man in the chair. That particular belief is not a dogma, and I have it on the word of authorities who DO know what they are talking about. Criticizing a pope is not the equivalent of “telling the Holy Spirit he was wrong.”

  26. Well, the Holy Father’s chances of popularity with the US fancy pants are shot– not because of the whole stand against homosexual marriage and all the other basic Catholic stuff, but because I just heard Rush saying nice things about him and pointing out that he doesn’t obey pols.

  27. From Bonchamps

    “We live in an age of widespread apostasy and sacrilege, arguably exacerbated and even encouraged – perhaps unwittingly – by a council and a radical reorientation of the Church by a series of popes thinking in a similar way.

    It is OUR DUTY to be skeptical, critical, and cautious given the times in which we live and the precedents which have been set. Ideally we can be respectful as well. But never forget that there have been horrible popes who have injured the Church. The Holy Ghost protects the seat from officially promulgating error, but there is nothing to suggest that it personally and directly picks the man in the chair. That particular belief is not a dogma, and I have it on the word of authorities who DO know what they are talking about. Criticizing a pope is not the equivalent of “telling the Holy Spirit he was wrong.”

    I mean, I don’t think the Holy Ghost was personally responsible for the three elevations of Benedict IX to the Papacy.

    http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02429a.htm

    “He was a disgrace to the Chair of Peter.”

    The Holy Ghost was simply involved in preventing this reprobate from teaching errors.”

    With all due respect, this looks as if it came from someone at the NCRonline. These are the types of posts that were made about Pope Benedict XVI before he had time to give his first Benediction. Again, I echo what Father Z said and what I said earlier about these kind of posts. On Father Z’s site some have asked that Rorate Caeli issue a retraction and apology since some of their posts were incorrect.

    Again, I want to state that I just can’t wrap my head around an orthodox-minded website that would put up laundry lists against the Holy Father ( which we now know wasn’t completely correct) before he gives his first Benediction.

    As for the Holy Spirit; one can always ignore the Holy Spirit’s guidance (at the peril of their soul) but he does guide the Conclave.

  28. “With all due respect, this looks as if it came from someone at the NCRonline.”

    I really don’t care, because everything I said was true and you didn’t contest it.

  29. Bonchamps, in charity I should probably consider that some of the things that you thought were attributed to then Cardinal Bergoglio have now been corrected and you may not be aware of them. I would just ask that you consider being grateful that we have a conservative Jesuit in the Chair of Peter. As for some of the bad popes we have had, I like the line by Father Mitch Pacwa SJ. We may very well have some popes in hell, but it is not the fault of the Holy Spirit. There are people who ignore the Holy Spirit, just as there were people who saw Jesus perform miracles and refused to believe. One more thing; keep in mind that this was probably the most conservative Conclave in any of our lifetimes (including those of you who may be centenarians!) There are no more Cardinal Martinis.

  30. ” I should probably consider that some of the things that you thought were attributed to then Cardinal Bergoglio have now been corrected and you may not be aware of them”

    Well, the Latin Mass disapproval may turn out to be false, as I have already acknowledged. But the false ecumenism is still an issue for me. Unless he has denounced his prior syncretic behavior in some statement I am not aware of, it will remain a valid and legitimate point of criticism, as it was in the case of all of the post-Vatican II popes. I will never ignore or condone such acts.

    ” I would just ask that you consider being grateful that we have a conservative Jesuit in the Chair of Peter.”

    I will be grateful when Catholic prelates are no longer afraid of causing offense to people in their own religions by proclaiming the truths of their own.

    I want a traditionalist, not a “conservative.” Being marginally better than the run-of-the-mill leftism of the modern hierarchy is not cause for celebration. As one comment I saw aptly put it, he’s like the Mitt Romney of popes. He’s not the radical egalitarian that we fear, but he’s not the leader we really need.

    “We may very well have some popes in hell, but it is not the fault of the Holy Spirit.”

    I never said it was. In fact, I argued the opposite. The Holy Ghost protects the chair from error, not the man from sin and even horrific mistakes in non-infallible areas.

    “One more thing; keep in mind that this was probably the most conservative Conclave in any of our lifetimes”

    God help us then.

  31. “As one comment I saw aptly put it, he’s like the Mitt Romney of popes. He’s not the radical egalitarian that we fear, but he’s not the leader we really need.”

    We all know what we each would prefer in a Pope and in our bishops, priests, etc for that matter. But as far as what the Church “needs”, that is the domain of Divine Providence. To engage in that level of presumption takes some serious spiritual cojones.

  32. According to Fr Z. then Cardinal Bergologlio implemented Summi Pontifcum within 48 hours.

    As for the false ecumenism:

    Exhibit 1:

    “”He lit a candle on the menorah, attended a Buenos Aires synagogue for Slichot, a pre-Rosh Hashana service, the Jewish New Year, as well as a commemoration of Kristallnacht, the wave of violent Nazi attacks against Jews before World War II,” Foxman said.”

    http://www.jpost.com/JewishWorld/JewishNews/Article.aspx?id=306351

    The last one isn’t a problem, but the first two are.”

    If you don’t think this is a problem, Bonchamps, why did you bring it up in this context?

    Now as to the other examples you brought up, what is objectively syncretic about them? The picture itself is a bit vague. There is nothing syncretic about having fellow Christians, separated brethen though they be, pray over you. One can certainly raise objections on prudential grounds, but that’s a different issue altogether. I find you citing the Tradition in Action website troubling. They have been on the monnbat fringe for at least a decade.

    If you are going to use Mortalium Animos as a cudgel, it would be wise to not only actually read the encyclical, but in the context within which it was written. The 1929 encyclical was occassioned by the 1927 Faith and Order Conference in Lausanne. Twenty years later, at the behest of Pope Pius XII, the Holy Office (now the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) issued, citing Mortlium Animos as a guide, issued a directive that allowed Catholic participation in the Ecumenical Movement : http://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDFECUM.HTM

    Now, Pope Francis will probably state prudential judgment you and I would disagree with. For instance, given his being from the Latin American world, chance are he will say things regarding the issue of illegal immigration that you and I would take umbrage with (as far as I can tell you nad I are pretty much of the same mind on the issue of illegal immigration. Yes, believe it or not, there is something you and I agree on). But these are issues of prudential judgment and not Church teaching. It seems to be Catholics of all stripes conflate the two at an alarming rate today.

  33. Donald:

    What would you be doing other than waste your time blogging if you were in the throes of bankcrupcy? Inquiring minds want ot know.

  34. “I just heard Rush saying nice things about him and pointing out that he doesn’t obey pols.”

    Here’s the full transcript of what Rush Limbaugh had to say on the topic (helpfully posted by one of Fr. Z’s commenters):

    http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2013/03/14/drive_bys_shocked_to_learn_pope_francis_is_catholic

    As I’ve explained before, I’m not a big fan of Rush Limbaugh but his remarks on the election of Pope Francis are right on the money and very encouraging coming from someone who is not Catholic.

    Ironically, it was from Rush himself that I learned of the election of Pope Benedict 8 years ago. I flipped on the car radio just as Rush announced that Cardinal Ratzinger was the winner and that he had taken the name Benedict — and in a tone that made it abundantly clear that he thought this was good news. It’s obvious that he admires the Church and its moral teachings, and I would not be surprised at all to see him jump the Tiber someday (his multiple marriages and divorces might seem to be an insuperable obstacle, but if Newt Gingrich could do it….).

  35. Greg,

    “If you don’t think this is a problem, Bonchamps, why did you bring it up in this context?”

    I’ll note, first of all that a) I was only talking about the last of three items and b) you didn’t address to first two at all. Presumably you don’t approve of such behavior either then. Good to know.

    As for the question, I was simply quoting the news service, and it seemed worthy of inclusion.

    “Now as to the other examples you brought up, what is objectively syncretic about them?”

    Objectively? He bowed before non-Catholic ministers. I’m not going to throw around the word “heretics”, but they do espouse a false version of Christianity that should not be acknowledged in such a way. I am not opposed to dialogue, but common prayer or some other action that implicitly or explicitly states that God approves of the non-Catholic sect is syncretic and wrong.

    “I find you citing the Tradition in Action website troubling.”

    Ok. Unless you are contesting the objective statements of fact in the link I provided, distinct from and opposed to the subjective statements of opinion, I find it disturbing that you would even bring it up. Are you so contesting?

    “If you are going to use Mortalium Animos as a cudgel, it would be wise to not only actually read the encyclical,”

    Cute. I have read it, many times.

    “but in the context within which it was written”

    I am familiar with that as well, though to be clear, teachings on the faith promulgated in an encyclical are not subject to “contextual interpretation.” If Pope Pius XI says that Catholics cannot participate in events that presuppose that all religions are “good and praiseworthy”, this is not something that can be changed. It is a statement expressing divinely revealed truth.

    On that note, absolutely nothing in Pope Pius XII’s statement contradicts or rescinds anything stated by Pius XI in Mortalium Animos. Nor does either document, for instance, contradict what Pope Leo XII wrote in his encyclical Ubi Primum:

    “It is impossible for the most true God, who is Truth Itself, the best, the wisest Provider, and the Rewarder of good men, to approve all sects who profess false teachings which are often inconsistent with one another and contradictory, and to confer eternal rewards on their members.” (14)

    http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo12/l12ubipr.htm

    If God does not approve all sects, sects that profess false teachings, sects that are inconsistent with one another – who are we to? Note again that withholding approval does not mean refraining from peaceful co-existence and dialogue, a point that I think was much more explicitly developed by Leo XIII and his immediate successors in the early 20th century.

    “as far as I can tell you nad I are pretty much of the same mind on the issue of illegal immigration”

    Yeah, we probably agree. No amnesty, shut it down. Or at least slow it down.

    “But these are issues of prudential judgment and not Church teaching. It seems to be Catholics of all stripes conflate the two at an alarming rate today.”

    Well, I am not in a position to say for certain which category it really falls under based on the details given. I don’t know the full extent of his participation in these events. But it is at the least prudential error, and I find it hard to argue that it doesn’t contradict the faith, as I also believe of the Assisi gatherings.

    With all of that said, however, I am not condemning the man to hell, espousing hatred for him, or anything of the sort. I recognize his authority and respect his office. But like many have done throughout history, by necessity and by duty, I must point out error and evil when I see it, even at the level of the Papacy, which frankly modern Americans have a far too sentimental view of. I mean, read a history book, read about some of the people who have occupied the chair and some of the people who opposed them. What we are promised by God with the Papacy is a very narrow set of things, outside of which there is a lot of room for sin, error, scandal and deviance.

    I don’t normally talk about these topics, but it seemed appropriate at this time. I probably won’t talk about it again unless he starts organizing Assisi IV… God help us.

  36. Paul D.,

    “But as far as what the Church “needs”, that is the domain of Divine Providence. To engage in that level of presumption takes some serious spiritual cojones.”

    Ok. You’re right. He’s not the leader I need personally, or the leader that many other long-aggrieved traditionalists need.

    But I also believe that the whole Church is being severely chastised as well. So I take your correction to heart.

  37. Greg,

    From your Pius XII link:

    “Although in all these meetings and conferences any communication whatsoever in worship must be avoided, yet the recitation in common of the Lord’s Prayer or of some prayer approved by the Catholic Church, is not forbidden for opening or closing the said meetings.”

    Any communication whatsoever in worship.

    So, I guess, if the Protestants were saying the Lord’s Prayer or another prayer approved by the Church, and the meeting was opening or coming to a close, then I would just question why he had to bow before them while it was taking place. Probably just a prudential issue.

    These conditions not being met, his actions would violate this directive. Oh I’m sure its been long since superceded by some post Vatican II document, but even so…

  38. Figuring out something more profitable to do Greg. Making money to support my family and myself would be my priority, and I assume that would take more time than my legal practice currently does. Since that is usually 60 plus hours per week, there would be precious little time left for much else, including blogging.

  39. This addresses a problem that does not exist for me. I am not vitriolic. And I won’t apologize for calling attention to documented facts.

    I’m too cynical at this point to be vitriolic about these issues anyway.

  40. This pope is going to have a lot of house cleaning to do. He is inheriting a real mess with all that’s gone on at the Vatican. All that talk about a lavender mafia and homosexuals running around seems to indicate there’s been some stuff going on. Then there’s the pedophilia cases. It’s an all around mess.

  41. The mainstream media has been very successful in making the public that the Abuse Scandal is an ongoing problem. There have only been a handful of cases that have come up in the last 10 years, though they only came to light recently. I can’t find the John Jay link but 98%-99% of the scandal happened in the 1950s-1990s. Unfortunately, I know too much about it. My childhood parish had two priests who spent time in prison for their abuse. As I have said here before, people I knew were abused and having worked for the Church I know the overall make-up of these abusers. I can tell you that the overwhelming majority of these priests were far from believers in Church orthodoxy. They made no secret about their desire to change Church’s teachings and beliefs.

Comments are closed.