Sunday, April 17, 2005

ratzinger

The NY Times (why do I read the NY Times anyway?) seems to think that Cardinal Ratzinger is leading the pack. They claim he has about fifty votes, which would be far more than the competition. On the other hand, it means that he has 117 minus 50 (67) no-votes. Who will it be? Its getting wild and wooly, as Dan Rather said on Election night in 2000.

7 comments:

Johnny Awesomo said...

I think I have a good chance of winning this year, vote for me.

Michael Moore
www.michaelmoore.com

Joe said...

Well, if this is true, then Ratzinger could be the choice...but then as Rather also said on election night "IF a frog had pockets he'd carry a hand gun and wouldn't be afraid of snakes."

Grace and Peace,
Joe

j-tron said...

My dad, who has been a faithful Catholic all of his life despite intense differences with the Church, actually told me yesterday that if Ratzinger is made pope he will likely make the leap and join the Episcopal Church. So I guess that means I'm going to have to root for Ratzinger now. Sure would simplify Christmas.

father wb said...

I wouldn't leave the Roman church because of a pope. And I certainly wouldn't become an Episcoplian in this day and age. There is way too much acrimony. Its hard to thrive spiritually, or at least I find it to be so. If I hadn't been born an Episcopalian (so to speak), I wouldn't come within spitting distance of ECUSA. I'd become Greek Orthodox or something.

But really, there's only so much a pope can do. Even if they elect Martini, its not as though he could (or would) sanction homosexuality, or ordain women. He couldn't, according to the Congregation DF.

Anonymous said...

Once I am made Pope, NO ONE will be allowed to leave the church voluntarily.

Cardinal Ratzinger

father wb said...

J-tron,

Please tell your dad I said "welcome to ECUSA; buckle your seatbelt."

On the other hand, see what Papa Ratzi says. Your dad could be playing right into his right wing hands:

...he is in favor of a smaller Church, but one that is more ideologically pure.

(This from the article in the NY Times.)

father wb said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.