Monday, April 18, 2005

Cardinal Tettamanzi


Cardinal Tettamanzi will be the next pope. Posted by Hello

posted by Michael J.W. Stickings at 12:55 AM

Bookmark and Share

5 Comments:

  • But is Tettamanzi the clear favotite (outside of Italy)? It sounds more and more like Ratzinger is an odds on favorite. As I said in my blog (no way jose...) I think that if we dont get a Pope by Thursday, it will go to a South American or Arinze from Nigeria. Ratzinger or Tettamanzi would be quick and easy (read old school) choices, but the longer the conclave goes, the more likely they will go for a different direction (a pope from outside Europe or a less conservative pope). One thing for certain, the Pope will not be one of the American cardinals unless something dramatic changes after they lock the doors.

    By Blogger jose, at 8:58 AM  

  • Actually, I see Tettamanzi more as a "third way" between Ratzinger on one side the reform-minded moderates on the other. He may be a suitable compromise. For my reasoning, see my recent post: Smoke, Mirrors, and Bells.

    The fact that he's no longer the favourite could mean, ironically, that he is.

    By Blogger Michael J.W. Stickings, at 4:28 PM  

  • I think Jose is right. Ratzinger or Tettamanzi will have to win early (no later than Wednesday), or the conclave will move on to other candidates and perhaps other continents. I predict nobody will win without Ratzinger's tacit approval, and I don't think Tettamanzi will get it, therefore, it won't be him. Conservatives + an Italian "favourite son" vote could make Angelo Scola or Carlo Ruini the next Pope. If the Latin Americans got behind a candidate acceptable to the Ratzinger bloc (probably not Maradiaga or Hummes, but perhaps Castrillon Hoyos, Bergoglio, or Errazuriz Ossa) that would be a powerful coalition as well.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 7:47 PM  

  • Cardinal Tettamanzi was the choice in his last years of Frank Young,who in 1999 published a book (PASSING THE KEYS) looking forward to the choice of the next Pope in the belief it would happen within a year,and who died in January without seeing the election happen.(In the book,he had given the edge to Carlo Maria Martini while Tettamanzi,Danneels,and the now-dead Neves and now-retired Piovanelli were the other leading candidates).

    We'll know soon enough if he was right,I just hope the new Pope does not call himself John Paul (I was mesmerized by John Paul I and thought John Paul II,whatever his accomplishments elsewhere,was a miserable failure at living up to what that name will mean to me forever).

    I am not a Christian,I believe there MUST be a God but see no evidence that He writes books,founds official fan clubs,or plays ethnic favorites.

    On the one hand,I see Catholicism as having erred in the past (as with flat-earthism and creationism) and in the present (as with abortion rights and contraception;on the other hand I strongly agree with their views on homosexuality and euthanasia),but a religion,to be taken seriously,MUST "stick to its guns" rather than "change with the times".The only values a religion properly concerns itself with are ones that can never change and are important precisely because of their permanence.On the one hand the Catholics have "modernized" too much (bishops should not be allowed to prohibit Latin Masses!) and on the other hand it's encrusted in ancient error (I wish they woke up and acclaimed Arius as a Father of the Church and junked the more irrational Nicene Heresy).But I'm not picking a Pope...I can hope at least that they will pick a Pope who believes in his job rather than one who will demolish things the way Blair happily does to the British constitution and Bush would to the US Constitution if he could.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 8:04 PM  

  • Well, now we know: It's Ratzinger. I've already posted my personal reflections on the papal election, but I'll write more on Ratzinger on Wednesday.

    Thanks for all your comments.

    By Blogger Michael J.W. Stickings, at 1:38 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home