Setting your expectations

I've been joyful since the selection due to both having a new pope and the man selected.

I've been too overly joyful knowing that the selection made those who disagree with me uncomfortable. Thank you for helping me see perspective.

Like 'c' before me, I also enjoy people being uncomfortable with the choice of our new Holy Father. For me, it's like an unspoken "Ha! So there!" knowing that this is just confirmation that the papal elections are not like political elections. Politicians are supposed to represent their constituents, which some of them do, but more often than not, they just represent their own agendas. Our Holy Father represents Jesus. Period. What we would like to see as far as changes in the Church don't matter. We didn't create the Church; Jesus did. Our Pope is Jesus' vicar on Earth. No more; no less. It is our Pope's responsibility to do the will of God, with the backing-up of the Holy Spirit. Not the will of the people. It's a simple arrangement, but flies in the face of the culture of "me".

By the way, my favorite thing that Benedict XVI has said recently, the day before his election: "We are moving toward a dictatorship of relativism which does not recognise anything as for certain and which has as its highest goal one's own ego and one's own desires." He could not be more right.

I am thrilled over the selection of Pope Benedict XVI!! The only thing that made me a little bit sad was that he didn't choose John Paul III for his name, in honor of our wonderful, late Holy Father, John Paul II. I guess I was hoping that he would do that because I do still miss our late Holy Father so much! I am a convert to the faith, I came into the church in 1996 and Pope John Paul II is the only pope I had ever known so, I am a little bit sentimental about him. I love this faith so much, all of the tradition, etc. that surrounds it. We have a beautiful religion and I am so happy that Pope Benedict XVI is going to continue on with the beliefs that Pope John Paul II held so dear.
My thoughts and prayers are with you all!!

I prayed and prayed about the Cardinals making the right choice and I believe that they did. I was afraid that they would choose a Pope that would try to satisfy the side of the Catholic Church that wants changes. There are certain things that are part of the Catholic faith and they shouldn't change. Thank you Lord.

I think that much of my disappointment about this choice for Pope is that there are some issues facing the church that need to be looked at from the "bottom" up instead of the "top" down. For example, there is a huge shortage of priests for which the faithful rely on for baptisms, weddings funerals and daily mass. Many parishes already share priests..I am very fortunate to be in a large thriving parish with 4 priests living in our rectory...we help 4 sharing parishes though who have 1 priest to serve the many needs of a poor community with no additional help. Beyond the Vatican, The church is the faithful people who come looking for that moral guidance so when I hear absolutely no to ordaining women(even though the gospels tell us that Jesus was surrounded by women especially at his death)when in the not so distant future there may not be any person available for the faithful, I am disappointed.

What a wonderful moment in our life time, to have been blessed by the Papacy of John Paul II and now get a new Pope that will follow his line of thinking and acting. Yes, I would have liked a Pope from the spanish speaking block, since there are so many spanish speaking catholics, however, the Holy Spirit help in choosing this Pope and we, as catholics , have to exercise our faith with humility and joy. May we enjoy his Papacy for as long as God want him to be with us.

It is amazing that the example of Pope John Paul ll is lost on so many. The liberals are looking for a dynamism and change in the Church. Well we had it with John Paul and we have it again with Benedict XVI. If the Church did not have the dynamism everyone is looking for , then why did so many turn out for Pope John Paul's funeral throughtout the world by being there physically and through television. It is not easy to be a good Catholic. Our popes prove that. I am willing to take the road our Lord laid out and it is through being a good Catholic that I hope to achieve the dynamism that our liberals so desperately seek.

It is amazing that the example of Pope John Paul ll is lost on so many. The liberals are looking for a dynamism and change in the Church. Well we had it with John Paul and we have it again with Benedict XVI. If the Church did not have the dynamism everyone is looking for , then why did so many turn out for Pope John Paul's funeral throughtout the world by being there physically and through television. It is not easy to be a good Catholic. Our popes prove that. I am willing to take the road our Lord laid out and it is through being a good Catholic that I hope to achieve the dynamism that our liberals so desperately seek.

As a lifelong Catholic, I'm so disappointed for the Modern Catholic American people. We've yearned for change within our church including some Priests. What a shame!. Life should be for the living and it's too bad the Pope and those leaders who nominated him have to continue to deter our wonderful gifts instead of increase them to be enjoyed by all people today. What a waste of our many talents and precious gifts.

Julie, when he was here in the flesh, women held a special place in Jesus' heart (and they still do.) But none were present at the Last Supper, not even his Blessed Mother. Furthermore, the number of ordinations are increasing -- but even if they weren't, there is nothing in the history of the early Church to suggest that Our Lord intended to ordain women of priests, and so we simply can't do it. The Jews never had female priests, either.

I don't really get what you're referring to, Elizabeth -- are you talking about women's ordination, too? If so, why would you think that your God-given gifts can only be lived out if you're ordained?

When are men going to stop the violence and abuse among women, children and other men including homosexuals. Not till I see them show them respect for all individuals with equal feelings, rights, tenderness and love. Until we see changes, men will continue to sin and spread their abuse to others in blindness.

RC: Just what color is your sky? I imagine a checkerboard of lemon yellow & lime green. "He believes the same as every Pope before him, without subtraction or contradiction." Utter claptrap! Please, will someone, anybody read history before proving Twain correct (It is better to be thought a fool, than to open one's mouth and prove it).
..."Please understand it, he will not change them. [that is correct, the old dottering fool!], ..."he doesn't have the power to do it." Of course, he does! Just where in history did you lose your indulgences, change from married priests (oh yes, they existed, BTW, they still do, but I'll let you figure out that one), that was changed because the Pope and the Vacitan was concerned about losing wealth to spouses and children, then there were gay marriages until the 15th century, the entire Western sexual ethos is based upon the perverse mutterings of Augustine of Hippo, Vatican I or II, espeically II brought dramatic changes by Pope John XXIII. Pope Paul II, the recently deceased old fool, silenced Rev. Curran, a theologian in India, and denounced Liberation Theology, [a lot of nothing it did with either Rev. Cuurran or Liberation Theology], so indeed the Pope can do things. The Pope is not a stick figure, he can make changes or not. Even Pope Benedict has already indicated that he is for changes within the Catholic church, potentially a smaller and more "orthodox" church. So again, he is not a stick figure. Fortunately, some of us are thankful that Rev. Curran is teaching at Southern Methodist University, where he continues to speak loud & clearly that the official ban on contraception has more to do with maintaining church authority than affirming life. "It has nothing to do with birth control. It's 'If we admit we're wrong here, we would have to admit we might be wrong on other issues.' They're terribly worried about the slippery slope."
Modern Catholic teaching on birth control has its roots in a 1951 encyclical by Pope Pius XII, who condemned artificial contraceptives as a violation of natural and divine law. In 1965, Pope John XXIII appointed a commission to revisit the issue. In a report to John's successor, Pope Paul VI, the panel of theologians, priests, bishops, cardinals and laypeople concluded that artificial birth control was not intrinsically evil and proposed that Catholics be allowed to decide the issue for themselves. But Paul rejected the proposal. In his 1968 encyclical Humanae vitae ("On Human Life" ), he reasserted the Church's "constant doctrine" that "every marriage act must remain open to the transmission of human life." The day after it appeared, a group of 80 American theologians (hundreds more later signed on) argued that the encyclical's reasoning was faulty. How many more examples do you folks who have two short-circuited synapses in the vacuous space between your ears need? The Pope could change this, but not this one.
The one fact missing is all of the discussion is the future war within the Catholic church between the ultra-conservative priests and the more liberal, yes even some of you, parishioners. Will there be a schism? Doubtful, absent a charismatic Bishop, and there hasn't been one since Fulton J. Sheen.

I am what one might consider a "cafeteria Catholic." I pick and choose what I want from the faith. I am a 33 year old who fits the culture of "me" that egoshake referred to. Having said that, I gave a sigh of relief when I read the background of Pope Benedict XVI. Just because I waffle in my faith, doesn't mean I want the Pope to.

I hope Kevin's calmed down somewhat. Despite his bluster, he is not as well informed as he thinks he is.

It's hard to tell what he is saying about indulgences, but he needs to read the Catechism if he thinks they have been abolished.

On contraception, isn't there also something relevant in the 1930 encyclical Casti Connubii? It was written at the time when Anglicans were adopting a view that legitimized contraception.

On married priests, Kevin's comment highlights the need to explain what is a matter of unchangeable doctrine (e.g., Catholic moral teaching) and what is a matter of changeable law (that married priests are not the norm in the Roman Church). I'll follow up about that in due course. Thanks for the lead-in!

i think the new pope will do a great job but we will miss jonh paul 2 very much.

Eric-First, I do not approve of the ordination of women. Although, I believe there were women deacons in the early church. Secondly, at the last supper, there were women present and probably children. The Passover meal is a family gathering that includes women and children. Besides, who do you think served?

RC-Could you tell me more about: "It was written at the time when Anglicans were adopting a view that legitimized contraception." Where can I get more information about this subject concerning Anglicans?

POPE BENEDICTS FIRST EDICT WAS READE TODAY IN YHE USA. ENTITLED THE POPES LETTER TO THE LAS VEGIANS.
SAME GAME. SAME RULES.
WWW.CAPTAINSBLOG.US

During the past few weeks, I kept hearing Cardinal Ratzinger's name mentioned. I knew I had seen that name before, and remembered his name was often mentioned with various papal annoucements. Then I remembered, it was in my copy of my well read, "Catechism of the Catholic Church", his name is listed under a section, "The process and spirit of drafting the Text" on page 3. This is in the introduction of the work authored by John Paul II. As a convert to Catholicism, I am reassured that the new pope is so intwined in the church that I joined.

Hi, Robinson.

The 1930 Lambeth Conference -- the decennial meeting of world Anglicanism -- approved contraception under some circumstances. A Google search for "1930 lambeth birth control" will lead to various articles mentioning the decision, but I haven't found the text of the Conference's statement on-line yet.

hes just another f/ing pope so to you religous finatics enjoy your oven cooking jerw killing crout

I'm not even Catholic, but I am so proud that the Cardinals have voted in a way that shows they are standing firm with the teachings of God. The Bible is very clear on many things that may make "modern" folks uncomfortable. Too bad. No one ever said it would be easy to be a Christian. Those who try to change what the Bible says or thinks that God would be OK with us being more progressive probably should spend a bit more time in The Word. Thank goodness for Cardinals who serve the Risen Savior!

Pope Benedict XVI has asked us to pray for him, lets do so now. The Holy Spirit chose him to lead his children (us), to the Kingdom of God. The Holy Spirit will not let us down. My prayer for the Holy Father is that he will always walk with God, tending "the Vineyard", right up to the day his mission is completed!

God bless you, Pope Benedict XVI!!!

Listening to man is dangerous. Listening to God is appropriate and divinely correct. The Word is God's voice. Religion is not about the "religion conforming to man" but "man conforming to religion". There is talk of religion not being "modern" and "progressive". I say, then start your own religion, don't try to bend the religious doctrines to fit a sinful lifestyle. Of course, it's tough. It's meant to be because it goes against what the evil spirit is trying to confuse humanity with regarding being comfortable and right for sinners. If you can't handle it...then leave. Basketball has a 10 foot high hoop. Just because you can't shoot that high doesn't mean we change the height for you. Take up golf.

Robinson, I should have been more clear: during the Last Supper, we don't know who was there during the entire Seder meal. However, Matthew is very clear who was present when Jesus confected the first Eucharist:

"While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, 'Take and eat; this is my body.'

"Then he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, saying, 'Drink from it, all of you.'" (Matt. 26:26-27, see also Mark 14:22-26 and Luke 22:14-20)

There is no mention of anyone else present.

Phase out ecumenism. For nearly it's 2000 year history the Catholic Church was clearly stated boldly as the Church of Christ. Outside the Catholic Church there is no Salvation! Period. It's been said, "The Church counsels the truth, but does not impose it." Bless the Benedict-A Proud Tradition for the Church of Christ!!

I THINK BENEDICT XVI WILL BE A GREAT POPE, HE WILL STAND ALONE, I AM NOT CATHOLIC, BUT LIKE THE RELIGION. GOD BLESS HIM ALWAYS.

I THINK BENEDICT XVI WILL BE A GREAT POPE, HE WILL STAND ALONE, I AM NOT CATHOLIC, BUT LIKE THE RELIGION. GOD BLESS HIM ALWAYS.

This pope offers nothing other than "more of the same." More of the same hypocrisy, hatred, bigotry and crimes against humanity. He should be imprisoned for those crimes as much as the last pope should've been. This religious nonsense is killing young, 3rd world country childrem because of myth, superstition, and sophistry. Interesting how cultures that have become educated, informed and civilized have shuned the ridiculous, illogical, irrational thinkings of this catholic cult. Its high time that we prohibit these cults from prostituting our society and drive them back into their churches to practice the hateful heinous acts they profess as dogam and catechism.

I am catholic and prode of it. Our Lord is with us. I well miss John Paul II may the Lord have him in his hands. And I hope that our new Pope well have good ideas for our chuch. The new Pope has a great heart and God Bliss him. And I wish him the best of luck in this world that we are in now. I Love You My Lord and Saver. May God Bliss ever one who read this comments.

I am all for the promotion of the faith, all for understanding there are moral absolutes, rights and wrongs and all for defending and promoting the rules and laws of God. It doesn't have to be easy or pragmatic, God's law are eternal and it is for us to follow him not for him to follow us. But after 2000 years it is getting hard to understand what the rules of God are -- and what rules have been added by man.

I don't think God said priests can't be married, that women can't be priests, that the only purpose of sex is procreation, or that condoms or birth control pills were sinful -- any more than he said we would go to hell for eating meat on Friday or missing Mass on Sunday.

I am all for a Pope that helps us to understand and follow God's rules but I also am for a Pope that understands that man's rules and laws are often wrong, often transitional, often need updating and sometimes simply need to be eliminated. Lets stop defending tradition for the sake of tradition and focus instead on God's laws and Christ's message.

Pope Benedict needs to worry less about the status quo, worry less about reenforcing the man made rules that have enveloped the church over 2000 years and worry more about how to identify and effectively promote the basic truths Christ taught us and God revealed.

I agree with the no change in the different rules in the church because if people realized what the Pope stands for, they wouldn't be pushing for changes. Jesus taught certain things, and no other human should change what Jesus put into place. If certain people want to, they should try another religion.

JulieAnn - Amen Sister. John Palazzini - tell us how you really feel, don't hide your feelings - I sense anger.

The Church doctrines / teachings will be the same under Ratzinger, as they were under Peter, John V, Paul VI, Clement I, JPII or would have been if Arize, Pell or Mahoney for that matter were selected as pope. Practices have changed - the faith has not and will not and cannot. THAT fact is what brought me back to the Church. Not the anti-womyn, anti-cultural, backward Catholic Church that I learned about in Catholic grade school and left at age 18, but the true Church, the one that BXVI talks about, Christ's bride.

Cathy, I picked up on John's discontent as well. His screed is long on conclusory statements, short on facts. Read a quote recently about the Catholic faith: "Truth does not depend on the number of people it convinces." Americans love their independence. They have a hard time sifting out pride, obstinancy and self-interested selfishness when they seek to apply their independence. People too easily lose sight of the fact that being obedient to the teachings of the Church involves being obedient to God. It is far easier to find fault with the rules when we break them than it is to admit our own imperfection as humans. Rather, we should be asking forgiveness and recommitting ourselves to living within the rules set down for us. May we be blessed with a long and fruitful papacy under Benedict XVI.

As a "Used-to-be-Catholic," I found myself vehemently defending the election of Benedict XVI. For a long time I've believed that it was the left-wing ecumenism of John XXIII that put the Roman Catholic Church on a path of self destruction.The Church was never meant to be a democracy with a Chinese menu that allowed you to pick and choose what canons and tenets you would like to observe. A strong "Our way or the highway" leadership, which, hopefully, the Church now has will lead it in the right direction.

I am proud to be a Catholic, I am Glad that Pope Benedict was chosen. Pope Paul the Great had a lot to do with this, He knew that he would be chosen. He will follow so close to Pope Paul the Great. We will remember him too. I was sure he would be chosen. Please give him a break and you too will be proud of him. Long May Pope Benedict the twenty six reign. May God guide him and give Iand give him a healthy life. These are the rules of the Catholic church, if you do not like them join another church to you belief. You remember Pope John Paul never tried to change anyones beliefs he would say become stronger in what you believe

Excerpt "The Catholic Church is not here to be changed by the outside world but she is here to change the World" Give me a break! Is that what we are "outsiders"? The Church sure has changed the world: By allowing and protecting pedofile priests to sexually prey on young innocent victims until finally exposed, fails to adjust itself to modern times and today's needs of her (diminishing)followers)Boring redundant rituals and gospel stories from 2000 years ago. Thats why I left the Catholic Church and the many hipocrites (not all, but many) who claim to be such good Catholics...who don't truly practice neighborly and decent virtues in everyday life.

Tom,

I'm not sure what you're getting at. If the Church is so irrelevant, why be so angry? Christ founded the Church for sinners. You are not going to avoid hypocrisy by leaving the Church, you'll only be avoiding the only real means of being finally free from it.

You are also overlooking the many decent and holy people in the Church, people who may not make the headlines. I'm still with the Church not because I don't think that the priest abuse scandal is serious, but because, as a sinner, I need the Church. If I was expecting a perfect institution, I would have left like you. As a cardinal once said, Christ must still be with the Church, since left to people like us, it would have been gone a long time ago since we've done everyting in our power to destroy it.

RC: Keep digging. "At its 1930 Lambeth Conference, the Anglican church, swayed by growing social pressure, announced that contraception would be allowed in some circumstances. Soon the Anglican church completely caved in, allowing contraception across the board. Since then, all other Protestant denominations have followed suit. Today, the Catholic Church alone proclaims the historic Christian position on contraception."
So again, know your history, the Anglican Church started with "limited" or some circumstances, but approved it across the board.
Indulegences, I am well aware of, no longer exist, the reference was to how and why.
Changes in fish on Fridays, (you could always tell who were the Catholics in public schools), nearly the entire Lenten season has been altered, (BTW, in my opinion for the worse, I would prefer a change back to greater emphasis on fasting, true giving up of worldly items during Lent, the Stations of the Cross, the bells and smells of Good Friday, Saturday and Easter Sunday. No one does theatre as well as the Catholic Church, but spirtually meaningful theatre. One possible point of agreement.)
The early Church did not require celibacy. We know that the Apostle Peter was married because Jesus healed Peter's mother-in-law when she had a fever. (See Matthew 8:14-15 and Mark 1:30-31). We know that bishops were married, because Paul gave them the guideline that they should only have one wife. (1 Timonthy 3:2) Paul mentions that Peter, other apostles, and Jesus' brothers were married. (1 Corinthians 9:5)
Pope Gregory VII reigned from 1073 to 1085. At the time, most Catholic priests were married. Married men want to financially support their wives and children. Kings and nobles donated property to the Roman Catholic Church in exchange for the faithful service of priests. Some priests tried to leave this property to their heirs. In addition, they had loyalty to the nobles who provided them with homes. In order to protect Church property, and to ensure that the loyalty of the priests went to the Pope and not to secular rulers, Pope Gregory abolished clerical marriage. He passed laws requiring that priests be celibate, and he got rid of married priests.
By passing a decree, the ninth Council of Toledo (655 A.D.) turned the children of married priests into Church property. They immediately became the permanent slaves of the Catholic Church. By passing a decree, the Synod of Melfi under Pope Urban II (1089) turned the wives of married priests into property. The priests were put into prison and their wives were sold into slavery. Their children were either sold into slavery or else abandoned. Married priests were a target of the Inquisition.
Now, RC, I am neither your professor or historian, so do learn your learn about "orthodoxy," or be prepared to be shown in error.
You have yet to address that the Pope is not a stick figure unable to do anything; when history and the evidence is contrary to the power of the Papacy. My core values are from the Catholic Church, but it has lost its way with the death of Pope John XXIII. Although, certitude is comforting to some, one needs to reflect that not one relgion is not a "Burger King" religion; "Have it Your Way." This includes Catholism. Please explain why there are 57 subdominations of the Baptist beliefs alone. Which one is correct? Which one am I do believe? One or none?
As you noted, the Church has changed and evolved over time, (i.e., indulgences, change from latin to the vernacular, etc.). Change is inherent in life and institutions or both die. Once again, the battle lies within the local churches. The parishioners (who are more liberal) or the crop of far right wing priests, who have known only Pope Paul II? It is much like those who have known only the Reagan years, which I call Reaganazi years, as I existed and knew others before Reagan. Overall, much like a kidney stone, the current climate of hatred (oops, Orthodoxy)
this too shall pass.
Kevin

Like so many others I too am pleased and happy with the new Pope.. I am glad that there will probably be little or no change when it comes to a moral stance by the church, ie: abortion, birth control, Female priests, Priests marrying, and cloning, etc. Can you imagine the scandal should a Priest marry and then get a divorce.?? A life of celibracy is not as hard as it may seem. you don't miss that which you never had.. It would seem the media and the "me first" generation has their own agenda, let us remember the word Catholic is not simply the name of a church. It has meaning, "universal, all encumbencing,". So you either believe and "be all that you can" be a Roman Orthodox Catholic, or don't claim to be. You need to live your religion not change it to suit your needs. As did so many of the other religions.

Kevin, you lost me after "Keep digging."

I'm kidding. Are you really seeking to understand? Are you aware that there are answers to your questions (not to mention your "facts" -- for example, celibacy has always been the norm in the fully sacramental churches, East and West)?

And can you at least cite sources for your more outlandish statements, such as the bit about selling the wives of married priests into slavery? I don't mean Jack Chick comic books either, but primary sources or reliable secondary ones.

Kevin. You need to learn to make necessary distinctions. Some things can be changed, others can't. Pointing out that some things have been changed is not an argument that anything and everything can be changed. Also, your knowledge of history is seriously wacko. Get a grip. My first piece of practical advice? Take everything Curran says and toss it in the garbage can, where it belongs.

Kevin's arguments need some de-confusing, so I'll give some here.

I was talking about the Church's doctrines being consistent over time, but he argued back, citing the law about Friday abstinence as an example.

That law has indeed been changed, but it doesn't contradict my point. One has to make a distinction between the Church's doctrines and the Church's laws. Laws can be changed; doctrines must remain consistent over time.

If it's hard to grasp the distinction right off, here it is:

When the Church commands us to do something, it's *law*. When the Church teaches us to believe something, it's *doctrine*. OK? That's what the word "doctrine" means: teaching.

For example, when the Church tells us, "Receive Holy Communion at least once a year, and make Confession if necessary", that's a command. It's a matter of law.

In contrast, "Stealing is wrong" is a doctrine. It's a statement about morality which the Church presents for us to believe. "Do not steal" would be a command.

Let's apply the distinction. The precept to abstain from meat on Fridays was a law, not a doctrine. Laws can be changed by the Church's legislators (the Pope and the bishops), and in fact, that law has been changed over time.

So on Friday abstinence, Kevin and I actually agree. That can change, and it has changed.

You can tell that Friday abstinence was a law and not a doctrine: we were obliged to act differently on Friday, but not to believe anything differently.

On the other hand, *doctrines* taught by the Church are matters of what is true and what is false. These are of course universal. Something true cannot become false. Even if you don't accept a doctrine of the Catholic Church, you should be realistic and accept that the Church does believe it and will not declare it false.

---

Kevin also cites some decrees of medieval councils fighting corruption among the non-celibate clergy in the 900s and 1000s, who at times treated parish benefices and even episcopal sees as personal property and bequeathed them to their children, although the obligation of celibacy had existed in parts of Europe as early as 302. (Council of Elvira in Spain.)

Those decrees of Toledo and Melfi, ordering that non-celibate priests and their wives and children by deprived of office, property, and even freedom were certainly severe; but regardless of how severe and how unjust those decrees were, they were not matters of doctrine. They don't add one stone toward building a case against the Church's doctrinal infallibility.

So Kevin doesn't present any evidence against the Church's infallibility in matters of faith and morals. Maybe he'll come to realize at some point that he believes in it after all!

I'll leave the last word on the subject to Kevin, if he wants to reply, but he needs to cut out the name-calling. I'm not going to accept any more of that here.