Cardinal Ratzinger of Germany Is New Pope
Thank god for him already being 78.
—
also Billmon’s post: Heil Ratzinger
|
|
|
|
Back to Main
|
||
|
April 19, 2005
Bendictus XVI
Cardinal Ratzinger of Germany Is New Pope Thank god for him already being 78. — also Billmon’s post: Heil Ratzinger
Comments
As far as I remember, not having been in a Roman Catholic church for some time, God is a conservative (hence the penchant for Polish anticommunists, Bavarian authoritarians and the noticeable disinclination to give the top spot to a woman in the past few hundred years), Jesus is a liberal, and the Holy Ghost is an anarchist. Posted by: Dismal Science | Apr 19 2005 17:08 utc | 1 That’s it. I have been wavering too long. Tomorrow I will leave the catholic church. Posted by: teuton | Apr 19 2005 17:11 utc | 2 His entry in the Malachi Prophecy is “Gloria Olivae” — the Benedictines are sometimes known as the Olivetans. So far so good. Just one more Pope, Peter The Last, and we can finally chuck the Church out. Posted by: Lupin | Apr 19 2005 17:29 utc | 3 So, why did he pick Benedictus as his Pope name? Well, Torquemada is a last name. Posted by: CluelessJoe | Apr 19 2005 17:32 utc | 4 ratzinger a.k.a. benedict(n) was/is the head of the inquisition, and he is from southern bavaria. Posted by: name | Apr 19 2005 17:49 utc | 5 You’ve got to be kidding…this stuff couldn’t be scripted any more like an apopcalyptic Hollywood movie, if there were actual Hollywood writers writing it… This from MSNBC pretty tells everything that needs to be told:
Darthvader (or Dick Cheney if you prefer) was just elected pope. Being brought up Catholic, I feel well within my rights to say screw the new pope and screw the Catholic church for electing this guy. It will be a good long time, if ever, that I go to a Catholic mass again. CJ: Posted by: jj | Apr 19 2005 17:55 utc | 7 I’m pretty sure if Hollywood was writing it, the preppy priest would have been forced to choose between the love interest and serving as Pope while saving the world from the Muslim Terror in a gripping roof-top chase through the Vatican. In one of his books Milestones, Ratzinger wrote, Posted by: Friendly Fire | Apr 19 2005 17:57 utc | 9 We’re having a meeting: Hello, my name is Joe, and……. Posted by: Joe Jackson | Apr 19 2005 18:26 utc | 11 To better appreciate Cardinal Ratzinger’s point of view as Benedict XVI you may want to check out the biography of Benedict XV. When Cardinals choose the names of prior popes as their own they do so for a reason. One of Benedict XV assets was his investment in peace. He tried his best to head off WWI without success. Wikipedia has a nice one-pager. Posted by: alnval | Apr 19 2005 18:28 utc | 12 the church in its wisdom could not have done worse than if they had chosen mephistopholes or the devil himself – guileo andreotti Posted by: remembereringgiap | Apr 19 2005 18:28 utc | 13 JJ: Joseph Ratzinger was for quite a long time the prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which was once known as the Holy Inquisition. And, as a Pope, you have a first name, not a last name – of course, you could argue he could’ve picked Tomas, which was Torquemada’s first name. Posted by: CluelessJoe | Apr 19 2005 18:38 utc | 14 geez! i thought stalin the second would have been appropriate. Posted by: lenin’s ghost | Apr 19 2005 18:39 utc | 15 debt-slavery bill passed. Ratzinger the next Pope. ANWR drilling unleashed. Bush not impeached yet. Marla Ruzicka dead. and the beat goes on. sheesh, isn’t there any good news? Does anyone know where that picture Billmon put up is from? Posted by: exitiorum | Apr 19 2005 18:44 utc | 17 I still don’t understand why some people actually believe they need a pope or religion, to be spiritual. Posted by: Ben | Apr 19 2005 18:54 utc | 18 no, its really stunning – the conservative & fascist forces are having hat tricks everywhere. ratzinger is opus dei’s man from his cloved feet to his horned head. whatever progressive tendencies within the church can be in no doubt – their defeat is total. the african, asian & latin american catholics have got a european hardman whose histroy is soied from the old times to the recent past Posted by: remembereringgiap | Apr 19 2005 18:59 utc | 19 This Pope stuff is way over my head, but it does seem plausible that the Ratz will provoke a major secession movement in his church if he gets too far out of line. Is he the one that tried to squelch the anti-sodomist movement in America? The deck was stacked, and everyone knew it. I’m with Jérôme. Who cares? Posted by: Knut Wicksell | Apr 19 2005 19:16 utc | 20 Note the connection between Eric Rudolph and Ratzinger. Ratzinger needed a quiet settlement of the Rudolph case, since Rudolph was a follower of a radical southern catholic church. Rudolph was against abortionists, gays, and race-mixers. Posted by: anon | Apr 19 2005 19:23 utc | 21 ratzinger was chief amongst those who in a bloody minded way destroyed the theology of liberation within the church. he has also been opposed to any modernist trend in relation to sexuality Posted by: remembereringgiap | Apr 19 2005 19:27 utc | 23 As much as Ratzinger sucks, and as much as I love Whiskey Bar, calling Ratzinger a Nazi was just lame. Yes, he grew up in Germany at the wrong time. But e.g. calling for denial of communion to John Kerry for not being anti-abortion enough, while allowing it for supporters of the death penalty, is disgusting. Call him on that instead. Posted by: Allen K. | Apr 19 2005 19:40 utc | 24 i was thinking of whom ratzinger resembles most historically & it came top me – clear as day – martin bormann – the silent & firm administrator. the plotter & counterplooter who works his way through the schisms to consolidate his own position Posted by: remembereringgiap | Apr 19 2005 19:45 utc | 25 allen k Posted by: remembereringgiap | Apr 19 2005 19:53 utc | 26 Off topic. Joe Biden is tearing Bolten a new asshole on C-Span two right now. It is great. Posted by: jdp | Apr 19 2005 20:01 utc | 27 Actually, I wouldn’t blame him to much as a person for having been in the Hitler Jugend since most of the kids were, and they weren’t even asked – especially consdering he came from Bavaria, the cesspool of German Catholic conservatism (this may also explain why he’s become quite a reactionary). That said, it is quite an issue if later on you want to become some prominent world leader. Posted by: CluelessJoe | Apr 19 2005 20:16 utc | 28 i’ll be eucamenic – ratzinger also possesses & physical & administrative similarity to the late yuri andropov – ex chef of the kgb & a premier for a transitional moment Posted by: remembereringgiap | Apr 19 2005 20:30 utc | 29 Via AP Posted by: Friendly Fire | Apr 19 2005 20:41 utc | 30 we’re overlooking that there are 2 separate issues here. 1) Who new pope is. 2) Method of selection. 117 people can’t decide on anything in one day. This was merely a handover of power, all worked out in advance. Does anyone have any numbers for how long these “convocations” have taken in the past. In my lifetime, they’ve been quite lengthy. Posted by: jj | Apr 19 2005 20:45 utc | 31 Ratzinger is a reactionary, but attacking him on his “Nazi” past just plays into the hands of his allies. Let’s have a little context – joining a seminary in 1941 was certainly not the act of a loyal Nazi – in fact it tagged you as politically unreliable as far as the devout Nazis were concerned. The Nazis used and coopted the more reactionary elements in the Catholic church to help keep people in line, but the Nazis were quite open about their dislike of Catholicism as an ideology. And yes, the resisters who got sent to Dachau did set an example – that resisting would get you sent to Dachau. Now a true Catholic believer should have been willing to martyr himself for the truth, but cowardice doesn’t make you a Nazi sympathizer. Do you consider Guenter Grass or Willy Brandt Nazi sympathizers? Posted by: Vanya | Apr 19 2005 20:49 utc | 32 OT – no vote on Bolton in FR comittee today, deliberations will continue next week. (Thx for the CSpan tip jdp) Let’s face it: all religions are placebos, and for most people the most effective placebo isn’t a sugar pill. The most effective placebos are bitter and make you feel sick to your stomach; that’s how you know they’re working. If the Catholic church dilutes its dogma into a sweet, easy-to-swallow sugar pill then it will lose its efficacy. Being saved (really saved) has to hurt. Posted by: Chris | Apr 19 2005 21:10 utc | 34 I’m going to Innisfree: Posted by: Friendly Fire | Apr 19 2005 21:24 utc | 35 i am not calling him a nazi – but yes he fills the bill for any fascist autocrat – & he has proved that lucidly in his 23 years as guardian of the faith & his ‘good works’ that preced that office Posted by: remembereringgiap | Apr 19 2005 21:25 utc | 36 Nazi is overstating it a bit. But the Catholic Church has a pretty gruesome history of complicity with fascism extending from the 1920’s Lateran Accord with Italy (Mussolini was the first Italian leader they would deal with after Italy’s unification in the 1800’s), right through its support for Nationalism in 1930’s Spain and then into WWII. Fascists and the Church’s authoritarians hated the same things – communism, modernism, the Enlightenment, Jews – and the two philosophies made all-too-comfortable political bedfellows. And then there’s that whole matter of the Inquisition and centuries of anti-Semitism. The Church is feeling too good about the peace its made with this history if its chosen as Pope the one guy eligible for the job who actually served in Hitler’s army. He’s not a Nazi – but still, what sane organization is going to choose an authoritarian, anti-modernist German with this history to lead them into the XXIst century? What exactly are they saying with this choice? Couldn’t you choose a guy who didn’t, you know, fight for Hitler in WWII, whatever the circumstances? Unfortunately, they’ve chosen the same type of anti-modernist as Pius IX who invented papal infallibility and Pius XII who fell into bed with Hitler one crazy night. “Nazi” may be inflammatory and wrong, but it fits Pope Benedict a lot better than most of the people – which is flying faster and more furious than pies at an Ann Coulter rant – who get hit with the tag and never even wore a Wehrmacht uniform. Posted by: NickM | Apr 19 2005 21:33 utc | 37 I don’t care about the pope. Posted by: Groucho | Apr 19 2005 21:36 utc | 38 I think a lot of the reaction on the left is overstated – first of all, how important is the Pope really? Even if you are a Catholic? This is no longer 1150, or even 1950. Yes, his anti-birth control stance will probably have a pernicious effect in Africa, but people tend to follow the lead of the clergy, and the African clergy tends to be fairly independent, albeit reactionary in many ways. The jubilation on the American Right is also misplaced. The reactionary elements in the Vatican do not particularly like the US. JPII was against the war in Iraq, and there’s every reason to think Ratzinger feels the same way. The American Empire is a threat to the Vatican in many ways. To the extent Ratzinger did digest reactionary fascist views growing up in 1930s Germany, those views typically included contempt for the materialist, shallow, overly democratic US so Ratzinger is not necessarily ready to be best buddies with Dubya. The sorts of American reactionaries he will support are not ones most American protestants or Catholics are going to find appealing. Posted by: Vanya | Apr 19 2005 21:59 utc | 39 the church in its wisdom could not have done worse than if they had chosen mephistopholes or the devil himself Posted by: MarcinGomulka | Apr 19 2005 22:12 utc | 40 vanya Posted by: remembereringgiap | Apr 19 2005 22:16 utc | 41 ô yes marcin gomulka i am what the polish would call a cultural bolshevik of cosmopolitan tendencies Posted by: remembereringgiap | Apr 19 2005 22:19 utc | 42 You’d think that after all this time, if they were going to finally elect a German pope, the cardinals would have had enough sense not to select someone with any Nazi credentials. Strange. Posted by: bcf | Apr 19 2005 22:34 utc | 43 Billmon nails it once again. (What else is new?) Posted by: Marie | Apr 19 2005 22:49 utc | 44 Well, you can always trust the Catholic Church to pick a nearly dead white guy to lead it. Posted by: Elizabeth | Apr 19 2005 22:52 utc | 45 So I shall call myself a social democrat. Posted by: MarcinGomulka | Apr 19 2005 23:03 utc | 46 “Ratzinger served John Paul II since 1981 as head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. In that position, he has disciplined church dissidents and upheld church policy against attempts by liberals for reforms.” Posted by: Anonymous | Apr 19 2005 23:40 utc | 47 He’s a fascist-compatible reactionary – though I agree w/bcf’s comment above. Wonder if Peggy Noonan will sing his praises in print tomorrow!! Posted by: jj | Apr 20 2005 0:08 utc | 48 oops that was my anonymous rant about the hatred of women in the church Posted by: gylangirl | Apr 20 2005 0:28 utc | 49 @jj it does occur to me that one way for the plutes to “make more jobs” is to force women back out of the workplace, thus freeing up more of the few remaining real US jobs for men. certainly this seems to be the thrust, you should pardon the expression, of Rush Limblohard’s repeated fanfaronades against “feminazis” and affirmative action: that women and Dark Persons are “stealing” jobs from good old boys, and that’s why Johnny can’t get a job. I was right. Just checked in w/americablog, an antidote to most of the sexism of straight male blogs. Amongst their other useful stuff, they had this from John’s resident expert on Catholicism: Posted by: jj | Apr 20 2005 0:35 utc | 51 Isn’t the Catholic church concerned about the declining population of European Christians? Posted by: jd | Apr 20 2005 0:38 utc | 52 @ DeAnander Posted by: gylangirl | Apr 20 2005 0:46 utc | 53 At this point, I WISH the Catholic Church were so broken toothed and decrepit and politically impotent that we could ALL say: I don’t care about the pope. And I say that even though I’ve written, at length, about the good things the church does that don’t make the papers or the blogs because they happen every day all over the world. Posted by: Billmon | Apr 20 2005 0:48 utc | 54 De- Posted by: jj | Apr 20 2005 1:04 utc | 55 on Ratzinger’s choice of name Benedict: Perhaps it is more about the latin translation of that name and his huge ego thinking it describes himself. Posted by: gylangirl | Apr 20 2005 1:19 utc | 56 Billmon wrote: Posted by: jj | Apr 20 2005 1:19 utc | 57 oh yeah.. the ‘feminization of poverty’ is another result of forcing married women out of the paid workforce via taxing women’s income more than men’s. Posted by: gylangirl | Apr 20 2005 1:22 utc | 59 Who would a thunk it… As has probably been said a million times already tonight, we have no way of knowing what was in Ratzinger’s heart in the early 1940’s. But we have plenty of reason to heap scorn upon him for his recent actions. Let’s leave the art of character asassination to the conservatives and instead provide a fact-based challenge to his positions. Posted by: Tom DC/VA | Apr 20 2005 1:41 utc | 62 @Tom dc/va – those who provide cover for those who eat their young under cover of authority cannot possibly have their character assasinated – they’ve already “suicided” it. Posted by: jj | Apr 20 2005 1:53 utc | 63 jj @ 9:19 pm, you are a person after my own heart. I believe that further cintrol of the masses through repressive religious belief is a phase of elite planning in this current cycle of history. Posted by: jdp | Apr 20 2005 2:01 utc | 64 Say what you like about these Moonotheists but they really, really LOVE talking about popes. It’s humbling to be in the presence of such experts for their ranks will always throw up one or two, or twenty or thirty, absolute experts on the life and inner thoughts of any cardinal you care to mention. Posted by: Martin Luther | Apr 20 2005 2:12 utc | 65 JDP wrote: Posted by: jj | Apr 20 2005 2:22 utc | 66 @martin luther: LOL! Yes they certainly elected a Catholic! As they say in my newly adopted religion, “all is in divine order!”. This pope will likely further marginalize the Church. Many liberal, yet JP2-starstruck, catholics had forgotten how far from Jesus the church had strayed. Now they will be reminded over and over. They are already voting with their feet. Ironically, the conservatives won’t mind. Posted by: gylangirl | Apr 20 2005 2:43 utc | 68 So people….. Posted by: Doctor Faustus | Apr 20 2005 2:53 utc | 69 I agree it may not be fair to bring up his brief and very young involvement with the Nazis, but when the hell did these bastards play fair? Posted by: thepuffin | Apr 20 2005 3:11 utc | 70 Seems to me that Nazism, like other Ponzi schemes, was — for those who got out in time with their loot — very profitable. Which makes me think that the difference between “an insane system that cannot possibly endure or be tolerated by decent people” and “a damn good profit-taking opportunity” is largely a matter of timing. Meanwhile the American Taliban continue their attempted putsch. As a cradle Catholic whose barely hanging on by a thread to any faith in the Church, I’m heartsick and angry and outraged by the choice of this new pope. The only possible worse pick for pope would have been Cardinal (Protecter of Pedophiles) Law. Posted by: ByteB | Apr 20 2005 4:19 utc | 74 Good comment from the Independent: Posted by: Fran | Apr 20 2005 4:34 utc | 75 Ulrich Zwingli Posted by: Pope Benedict XVI | Apr 20 2005 5:00 utc | 76 Weird image from Time magazine main page. Posted by: cashmere | Apr 20 2005 5:21 utc | 77 I think i’ve heard that at Bob Jones University they think the Pope is the Anti-Christ – as has been said, even a stopped clock is right twice a day. Posted by: Marcus Twainus | Apr 20 2005 5:24 utc | 78 From a article in Der Spiegel:
Posted by: Fran | Apr 20 2005 5:43 utc | 79 There is a fascinating article featured on Arts and Letters Daily.http://www.aldaily.com/ Posted by: susan | Apr 20 2005 6:00 utc | 80 Well, the New Testament is incomplete. Even today there are additional Gospels available from the Nag Hammadi scrolls found about 3 decates ago in Egypt. Posted by: Fran | Apr 20 2005 6:06 utc | 81 I don’t care about the Pope very much either, but I am puzzled by the venom of a crowd of non-catholics. You really do seem shocked that the Cardinals didn’s elect a black muslim woman to be Popey. “Well, the New Testament is incomplete. Even today there are additional Gospels available from the Nag Hammadi scrolls found about 3 decates ago in Egypt.” Posted by: susan | Apr 20 2005 6:36 utc | 83 If we’re a bit touchy on the subject of reactionary males wielding power in the name of religion, Colman, it’s probably ‘cuz we live in a country where they’re ascendant. And if you’ve been following the press & blogs in recent days, they’re threatening this very moment to take over our judiciary – the last of the three branches they haven’t seized. They are also implementing a plan to take over moderate & liberal Protestant churches. These guys may be largely fundie Protestants, rather than Catholics, but it was Ratzo who Personally Intervened in our last election to a) deny communion to Kerry & anyone else who supports abortion-rights b). tell bishops to mobilize congregations to vote for Bu$h. Catholics who traditionally vote xDem., numerically went for Bu$hCo. according to official ’04 results – whatever the fuck that means w/rigged elections, but at least it provided sufficient cover to allow the thieves to rig the catholic vote. Many of us take this as a very personal threat to our welfare. As far as America is concerned, I think he’s already had his 100 days that Kung would give him. So, say now that he’s pope, he counters it w/urging bishops to work against the death penalty, so as to leave some balancing legacy. Sorry, it doesn’t even the scales. Posted by: jj | Apr 20 2005 6:42 utc | 84 Susan, they can’t see or hear anything that challenges their beliefs: no such thing exists in their universe. “Susan, they can’t see or hear anything that challenges their beliefs: no such thing exists in their universe.” Posted by: susan | Apr 20 2005 7:03 utc | 86 @jj & gylangirl: Posted by: Shoeless Joe Stalin | Apr 20 2005 7:45 utc | 87 Fascinating story from Arts and Letters Daily, Susan. Incredible! Thank you for that post. Posted by: SJS | Apr 20 2005 9:03 utc | 88 Now this is becoming hysterical:
Posted by: Fran | Apr 20 2005 9:40 utc | 89 The interesting thing about Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger was that he was a zealous servant of his superiors, whether it was the more liberal Paul VI who named him a bishop and cardinal, or John Paul II (since 1981). There is very little of his own philosophy out there. Posted by: Saint Fnordius | Apr 20 2005 10:54 utc | 90 Saint Fnordius, that’s the impression I’m getting from coverage here: people who know him don’t seem to kno what to expect from him. We’ll see what happens. colman Posted by: remembereringgiap | Apr 20 2005 12:20 utc | 92 I’d really love to talk to Mary Daly about the new pope. Anybody got a line on where she is and how to write her? For the young’uns and unitiated, Daly is one of the old-time feminists… a former Catholic with all the education to be an ordained priest, Daly was a professor until recently at Boston College (I think it was BC)… firmly broke with the Church years after writing “Beyond God the Father”. Posted by: Kate_Storm | Apr 20 2005 12:58 utc | 93 rememberinggiap: worse than that – they do not have vision Posted by: Kate_Storm | Apr 20 2005 13:03 utc | 94 Saint Fnordius, the story his followers put out is that he turned against the liberal stream when he was confronted with the ’68ers at Tübingen; when students shouted him down during lecture. I’m collecting material for my 9th Harry Potter novel, ‘Harry Potter unmasks Joseph Ratzinger as the Man on the Grassy Knoll and the man who secretly colluded with the Grinch to steal Christmas’ and I’d be very interested in hearing from any posters who were in Dallas on that fateful day, November 22nd 1963, who think they may have seen Pope Benedict XVI lurking near the crime scene (or who would be willing to say that he was, or to allege that he harbored in his heart an intention to be there). Similarly, any posters who have the goods on how the new Pope conspired with the Grinch to destroy one of the world’s major economic (and apparently Christian I’m told), festivals are invited to get in touch with me and dish the dirt. If you don’t have any first hand knowledge of the Pope’s evil hearted plots and malign intentions don’t worry, just make them up as you usually do. Posted by: J.K. Rowling | Apr 20 2005 14:41 utc | 96 can’t have a global empire w/o repression at home. the church is following orders, though one could argue whether those orders have ever been formalized. vision? i think the right does have a pretty good idea of what it needs to do to retain power and fend off threats. as for western religion, well, their vision happened around the time they transitioned from b.c. to a.d. and they are tasked w/ the mission to proselytize & subjugate the masses w/ this extraterrestrial ideology, which just so happens to correspond quite faithfully w/ tyranny. Posted by: b real | Apr 20 2005 15:03 utc | 97 OK, it’ll be OT, but whatever… Posted by: CluelessJoe | Apr 20 2005 15:41 utc | 98 Clueless Joe
Posted by: citizen | Apr 20 2005 16:48 utc | 99 That’s weird. I could have sworn I closed that blockquote. Sorry folks. Posted by: citizen | Apr 20 2005 16:52 utc | 100 |
||