What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

2025 Papal Conclave - UPDATE: **POPE LEO XIV - First American Pope** (3 Viewers)

i hope they get a pope in the mold of francis we need a whole helluva lot more of that kinda guy in the world take that to the bank brochachos

As a confirmed Catholic I massively disagree and think that liberation theology is a nightmare. He was a disaster for philosophical doctrine and tradition. You might see his love of the poor but his situational ethics (relativism vs. truth) and borderline communist economics (his anti-production and MMT economic adviser) were and are a disaster and a loser proposition for the Church. His absolutism about immigration might cost Vatican City its own character, never mind the countries he administered to.

Worst Pope since Pius XII in WWII

And you can’t take him to the bank because he didn’t believe in banks, brohan.
As another confirmed Catholic I have to disagree with this take. I heard a great homily a couple weeks ago that put it in this context: JP II was a philosopher, B XVI a theologian, and Francis a pastor. I think that's an apt analogy and recognize that there is historically a lot of diversity to be found in our approaches. The 70 years or so after a council is a period of upheaval in the church, as I mentioned in another thread recently, and personally while some of the things he said may have seemed controversial, I think that on balance he did a pretty good job.

FWIW, I would say the same about B XVI and consider JP II a great pope. Exactly who we needed when we needed him, and a huge influence on my life and most of my age group.
 
The first sign of old age is when you are older than the President. The last sign is when you are older than the Pope.
JP II was 58 when he became pope.

That said, I think the over/under on the age of the next pope is probably 65, and I'd probably bet the over :)
 
i hope they get a pope in the mold of francis we need a whole helluva lot more of that kinda guy in the world take that to the bank brochachos

As a confirmed Catholic I massively disagree and think that liberation theology is a nightmare. He was a disaster for philosophical doctrine and tradition. You might see his love of the poor but his situational ethics (relativism vs. truth) and borderline communist economics (his anti-production and MMT economic adviser) were and are a disaster and a loser proposition for the Church. His absolutism about immigration might cost Vatican City its own character, never mind the countries he administered to.

Worst Pope since Pius XII in WWII

And you can’t take him to the bank because he didn’t believe in banks, brohan.
As another confirmed Catholic I have to disagree with this take. I heard a great homily a couple weeks ago that put it in this context: JP II was a philosopher, B XVI a theologian, and Francis a pastor. I think that's an apt analogy and recognize that there is historically a lot of diversity to be found in our approaches. The 70 years or so after a council is a period of upheaval in the church, as I mentioned in another thread recently, and personally while some of the things he said may have seemed controversial, I think that on balance he did a pretty good job.

FWIW, I would say the same about B XVI and consider JP II a great pope. Exactly who we needed when we needed him, and a huge influence on my life and most of my age group.

Fair enough. You are certainly more devout and attuned to this than I am. You certainly could argue that Pope Francis’s concern with making sure that the laity had a personal connection to an inclusive Church made the confusion about doctrine worth it. If you are looking to grow the Church or make it relevant to the maximum amount of people, then certainly the inclusiveness and media sympathy afforded Francis because of his looser application of expectations could be seen as a benefit.

As a lapsed practitioner and nonbeliever I generally defer to those who practice. Note that my rebuttal is aimed at those who presumably don’t practice and wish for the Catholic Church to elect a leader who is in keeping with modern sentiments.

I understand the risk of even a comment. There is a running joke about the person who says, “I’m not a Catholic but this is who should be your Pope.” It’s definitely something I deliberated about before commenting.

I don’t counsel or pretend to tell the Church who they should sanction and I admittedly look at Popes with an outsider’s interest and an eye towards the sociopolitical aspect of it. But I give myself a reprieve because I am conscious that I am doing that. Many people (not necessarily SWC) aren’t conscious or reticent, nor are many people who comment aware of Francis and his outlook beyond his gestures toward the poor.

And I would go further into somebody like Francis and his infallibility being a huge reason why I am not part of the Church and it is playing out in real time. I think hierarchies that are unaccountable and that can be stacked (like Francis is said to have done with the current Conclave) with a particular brand of ideologue can create a mess of epic proportions. But I’ll stop now and let people enjoy the selection process.
 
Black smoke.

Am I right in thinking we don't know anything about who got most votes or anything like that?

Just that nobody got the required 2/3?

Yeah 1st vote is generally where a wide variety of Cardinals get votes - somewhat to take the overall temperature and also probably to put names out there that maybe haven't had heavy consideration but get more of a look because they get a surprise vote. Going back to 1830-31 the minimum number of ballots have been 3. Benedict XVI was 4, Francis was 5, John Paul II was 8. With less Italian speakers and less interaction amongst each other and being from more places my personal guess is it goes to vote 9.


It does seem like maybe it is time for another Pope Urban...

-QG
 
go to church every sunday just for the record and i loved pope francis just how i feel i think his way is what the church needs less condemn and hate bs and more of the love your neighbour stuff take that to the bank brohans
 
when i’m in rome it’s gonna be awfully hard to see the smoke through the existing smoke; 98% of all italians seem to be chain smokers.
 
Can they pick any name they want or are there guidelines? Can we end up with "Pope Pizza Balla Banana Hammock Humperdink" if that's what he wanted?
 
Black smoke.

Am I right in thinking we don't know anything about who got most votes or anything like that?

Just that nobody got the required 2/3?

Yeah 1st vote is generally where a wide variety of Cardinals get votes - somewhat to take the overall temperature and also probably to put names out there that maybe haven't had heavy consideration but get more of a look because they get a surprise vote. Going back to 1830-31 the minimum number of ballots have been 3. Benedict XVI was 4, Francis was 5, John Paul II was 8. With less Italian speakers and less interaction amongst each other and being from more places my personal guess is it goes to vote 9.


It does seem like maybe it is time for another Pope Urban...

-QG

Thanks. Sorry for the dumb question, but I'm assuming the totals for votes are made clear to the Cardinals voting, right? Anyone else?

Do they have set time for meeting and discussion between the votes?

Is there "bargaining" type stuff that happens where people are convinced to vote for ________ if the party receiving votes puhes policy a certain way? That kind of thing?
 
Black smoke.

Am I right in thinking we don't know anything about who got most votes or anything like that?

Just that nobody got the required 2/3?

Yeah 1st vote is generally where a wide variety of Cardinals get votes - somewhat to take the overall temperature and also probably to put names out there that maybe haven't had heavy consideration but get more of a look because they get a surprise vote. Going back to 1830-31 the minimum number of ballots have been 3. Benedict XVI was 4, Francis was 5, John Paul II was 8. With less Italian speakers and less interaction amongst each other and being from more places my personal guess is it goes to vote 9.


It does seem like maybe it is time for another Pope Urban...

-QG

Thanks. Sorry for the dumb question, but I'm assuming the totals for votes are made clear to the Cardinals voting, right? Anyone else?

Do they have set time for meeting and discussion between the votes?

Is there "bargaining" type stuff that happens where people are convinced to vote for ________ if the party receiving votes puhes policy a certain way? That kind of thing?
They are sequestered until they pick a pope. They know the results, but no one else. There was a break between the votes this morning and the votes this afternoon, which is when I’m sure a decent amount of bargaining was done. Pope Benedict and Pope Francis were both second day selections.
 
Black smoke.

Am I right in thinking we don't know anything about who got most votes or anything like that?

Just that nobody got the required 2/3?

Yeah 1st vote is generally where a wide variety of Cardinals get votes - somewhat to take the overall temperature and also probably to put names out there that maybe haven't had heavy consideration but get more of a look because they get a surprise vote. Going back to 1830-31 the minimum number of ballots have been 3. Benedict XVI was 4, Francis was 5, John Paul II was 8. With less Italian speakers and less interaction amongst each other and being from more places my personal guess is it goes to vote 9.


It does seem like maybe it is time for another Pope Urban...

-QG

Thanks. Sorry for the dumb question, but I'm assuming the totals for votes are made clear to the Cardinals voting, right? Anyone else?

Do they have set time for meeting and discussion between the votes?

Is there "bargaining" type stuff that happens where people are convinced to vote for ________ if the party receiving votes puhes policy a certain way? That kind of thing?
There is time for prayer and discussion in between the votes.

It would be a mistake to consider this a political event (although there are certainly aspects of it where politics come into play). It's actually held in a chapel for a reason. "Election" is the mechanism used to determine the new pope, but discernment is what's really going on. And Catholics believe that the Holy Spirit is the most important conclave participants.
 
Black smoke.

Am I right in thinking we don't know anything about who got most votes or anything like that?

Just that nobody got the required 2/3?

Yeah 1st vote is generally where a wide variety of Cardinals get votes - somewhat to take the overall temperature and also probably to put names out there that maybe haven't had heavy consideration but get more of a look because they get a surprise vote. Going back to 1830-31 the minimum number of ballots have been 3. Benedict XVI was 4, Francis was 5, John Paul II was 8. With less Italian speakers and less interaction amongst each other and being from more places my personal guess is it goes to vote 9.


It does seem like maybe it is time for another Pope Urban...

-QG

Thanks. Sorry for the dumb question, but I'm assuming the totals for votes are made clear to the Cardinals voting, right? Anyone else?

Do they have set time for meeting and discussion between the votes?

Is there "bargaining" type stuff that happens where people are convinced to vote for ________ if the party receiving votes puhes policy a certain way? That kind of thing?
To answer a couple questions - there is a process where a team of 3 Cardinals (randomly selected before rounds) examine each ballot and the 3rd Cardinal announces each ballot and they keep the tally.

So the Cardinals know the numbers - but the public will never know.

They can huddle over night and discuss with each other during the meal breaks etc.

I don't think there is bargaining in the conventional way - it is more persuasion. But the winning candidate isn't electioneering in that particular way.

It is a tally of individuals with looser or tighter alliances with their colleagues.

-QG

 
Black smoke.

Am I right in thinking we don't know anything about who got most votes or anything like that?

Just that nobody got the required 2/3?

Yeah 1st vote is generally where a wide variety of Cardinals get votes - somewhat to take the overall temperature and also probably to put names out there that maybe haven't had heavy consideration but get more of a look because they get a surprise vote. Going back to 1830-31 the minimum number of ballots have been 3. Benedict XVI was 4, Francis was 5, John Paul II was 8. With less Italian speakers and less interaction amongst each other and being from more places my personal guess is it goes to vote 9.


It does seem like maybe it is time for another Pope Urban...

-QG

Thanks. Sorry for the dumb question, but I'm assuming the totals for votes are made clear to the Cardinals voting, right? Anyone else?

Do they have set time for meeting and discussion between the votes?

Is there "bargaining" type stuff that happens where people are convinced to vote for ________ if the party receiving votes puhes policy a certain way? That kind of thing?
There is time for prayer and discussion in between the votes.

It would be a mistake to consider this a political event (although there are certainly aspects of it where politics come into play). It's actually held in a chapel for a reason. "Election" is the mechanism used to determine the new pope, but discernment is what's really going on. And Catholics believe that the Holy Spirit is the most important conclave participants.

Thanks. I didn't say I considered it a political event. I don't know and that's why I was asking, In this case, I was asking if "bargaining" type stuff happened.
 
Can they pick any name they want or are there guidelines? Can we end up with "Pope Pizza Balla Banana Hammock Humperdink" if that's what he wanted?

I understand you're being funny but for anyone genuinely curious, the decision is deeply personal and generally they base their name off a predecessor or a saint.

They changed the rules about 5 years ago to allow for NIL agreements. So we might have a Pope Cryptodotcom.
 
I hope ESPN doesn't spoil the pick before they announce it at the podium :mad:

-QG
Shams: The Popes are strongly considering Luis Antonio Tagle with this upcoming pick. Congratulations to Rich Paul and Klutch Sports for negotiating this historic deal.
 
Black smoke.

Am I right in thinking we don't know anything about who got most votes or anything like that?

Just that nobody got the required 2/3?

Yeah 1st vote is generally where a wide variety of Cardinals get votes - somewhat to take the overall temperature and also probably to put names out there that maybe haven't had heavy consideration but get more of a look because they get a surprise vote. Going back to 1830-31 the minimum number of ballots have been 3. Benedict XVI was 4, Francis was 5, John Paul II was 8. With less Italian speakers and less interaction amongst each other and being from more places my personal guess is it goes to vote 9.


It does seem like maybe it is time for another Pope Urban...

-QG

Thanks. Sorry for the dumb question, but I'm assuming the totals for votes are made clear to the Cardinals voting, right? Anyone else?

Do they have set time for meeting and discussion between the votes?

Is there "bargaining" type stuff that happens where people are convinced to vote for ________ if the party receiving votes puhes policy a certain way? That kind of thing?
There is time for prayer and discussion in between the votes.

It would be a mistake to consider this a political event (although there are certainly aspects of it where politics come into play). It's actually held in a chapel for a reason. "Election" is the mechanism used to determine the new pope, but discernment is what's really going on. And Catholics believe that the Holy Spirit is the most important conclave participants.

Thanks. I didn't say I considered it a political event. I don't know and that's why I was asking, In this case, I was asking if "bargaining" type stuff happened.
Definitely, and I didn't think you were saying that. But a lot of the words used in the reporting makes it sound just like a political negotiation, and I think it's important to mention that it's not intended to be that way and I'd like to hope that most of the cardinals don't see it that way either. The lines between electioneering and discernment are certainly not clear and distinct, but I think QuizGuy says it well above that it's not bargaining in the conventional way.
 
Black smoke.

Am I right in thinking we don't know anything about who got most votes or anything like that?

Just that nobody got the required 2/3?

Yeah 1st vote is generally where a wide variety of Cardinals get votes - somewhat to take the overall temperature and also probably to put names out there that maybe haven't had heavy consideration but get more of a look because they get a surprise vote. Going back to 1830-31 the minimum number of ballots have been 3. Benedict XVI was 4, Francis was 5, John Paul II was 8. With less Italian speakers and less interaction amongst each other and being from more places my personal guess is it goes to vote 9.


It does seem like maybe it is time for another Pope Urban...

-QG

Thanks. Sorry for the dumb question, but I'm assuming the totals for votes are made clear to the Cardinals voting, right? Anyone else?

Do they have set time for meeting and discussion between the votes?

Is there "bargaining" type stuff that happens where people are convinced to vote for ________ if the party receiving votes puhes policy a certain way? That kind of thing?
There is time for prayer and discussion in between the votes.

It would be a mistake to consider this a political event (although there are certainly aspects of it where politics come into play). It's actually held in a chapel for a reason. "Election" is the mechanism used to determine the new pope, but discernment is what's really going on. And Catholics believe that the Holy Spirit is the most important conclave participants.

Thanks. I didn't say I considered it a political event. I don't know and that's why I was asking, In this case, I was asking if "bargaining" type stuff happened.
I have heard a lot of reporting that there is significant "discussion" between the votes -especially at meals. I assume they are trying to form loose coalitions based on their progressive ,moderate or conservative perspectives. So in a way, kind of political.
 
Also the issue go beyond sort of political considerations. They are also hiring a manager effectively so it may be a matter of things that were neglected or alternately over managed that become considerations. Personality style - Francis tended to be a bit off the cuff so maybe a more reserved/careful personality comes in.

A lot of times the "surprise" comes from this - Benedict and Francis didn't have the same viewpoint on certain issues and yet a electorate made up of Cardinals chosen by very conservative Popes turned to Francis - who had a more pastoral style than the very professorial approach of Benedict. It is a whole jumble of things altogether. It is why it is so fascinating.

-QG
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top