Vatican City 2013 papal election

[Franzl]

It's very much grasping at straws, from what I've seen and the general impression I have.

[Edu]

It's backed by a pretty authoritative Argentine journalist though.

I hope you are not talking about Horacio Verbitsky, because calling him an authoritative journalist is pretty hilarious.
He's a Kirchnerist hack who regularly ignores corruption of the people he agrees with and completely destroys the people he disagrees with. And while a lot of his investigations during the Menem government were good, during the next decade he started to resort to baseless accusations as a regular modus operandi.

Plus he was a terrorist, so excuse me if I take the things he writes about with skepticism. And Antonio knows that I'm not exactly a right winger, so my opposition to him has nothing to do with his ideology, but more to the fact that he is a scumbag.


Also, several people involved in human rights causes (people who investigated and tried the last military junta, for example) have defended him. His only criticism might be that "he didn't do enough" which is something easy to say decades after the fact.


By the way, the election of Francis had quite some hilarious consequences around here. Since Bergoglio has been a longtime opponent of the Kirchners a lot of their allies went to the media the minute he was elected to destroy him and propagate the Verbitsky story (Kirchnerist "piquetero" Luis D'Elia for instance, wrote a tweet that basically says that Pope Francis was appointed by the imperialist United States to fight against the great South American revolutionaries, similar to what they did when they chose John Paul II to fight against the Soviet Union. I don't know if it's more hilarious the fact that he thinks Obama appoints the pope or something like that or the apparent feeling in the tweet that influencing people against the Soviet Union in a peaceful manner was bad )

But a large number of die-hard kirchnerist went the opposite way and pondered him like he was Jesus Christ himself calling the story bullcrap.
So, not only they are bipolar on this issue but considering that Cristina met with the Pope today and they were acting like buddies, it appears a lot of Kirchnerists were left hanging in the wind, and frankly, anything that puts the Kirchnerists into disarray (no matter how small or dumb the issue might be) is a good thing in my book.

Also beware of some of the pictures circulating around the web that apparently show Bergoglio with Videla. At least a few of them were "Fakes" (in the sense that it wasn't Bergoglio in the picture but some other guy).


I'm an atheist and I was very much opposed to the role Bergoglio had in the whole Gay marriage affair, but everyone I talked to in the past few days that has even a remote connection with the church or with him have told me he is a great person. So, I'm optimistic he will do good things for the people on issues like poverty, though unfortunately I don't expect much to really change with the church itself, but I hope I'm wrong.


Of course I'm not saying all these accusations are necessarily untrue. it's just that I question  the source and until we are presented with actual evidence of this, he should be considered an innocent man in this regard. Also, considering that the kirchnerists are all too happy to prosecute anyone, even though they might have had only an indirect relationship with the junta, I'm guessing that if there were factual evidence of crimes committed by bergoglio, the government would have tried to prosecute Bergoglio years ago.

Don't know why I bother since most of what I posted apparently is in Wikipedia too but in any case, I should say as a fellow fan of the San Lorenzo de Almagro Football club that even though we don't have any international cups, we have a Pope (and Viggo Mortensen )

[politicus]

Thanks for enlightning us Edu. It was interesting. 

I should say as a fellow fan of the San Lorenzo de Almagro Football club that even though we don't have any international cups, we have a Pope (and Viggo Mortensen )

What do you have against Viggo Mortensen?

[Edu]

What do you have against Viggo Mortensen?

Oh, nothing at all. But he's not our most famous fan anymore I guess

[Antonio the Sixth]

Edu, thank you so much for taking the time to write that post and explain things to us with your firsthand knowledge. I must say it's quite heartwarming for me to realize that these accusations are not nearly as credible as I thought they were initially. I really, really want to believe in Francis' innocence in all this (it seems clear that his attitude during the dictatorship was cautious as well, but nobody can blame him for that).

[Paleobrazilian]

While there's still a lot from the conclave to leak, rumours say Pope Francis (then Cardinal Bergoglio) began the conclave with an unexpectedly high tally of votes, probably thanks to the "Third World coalition", which put him at #3 at that moment. Scola probably started with the lead, but his total was quite lackluster. Right behind him was Ouellet. Scherer, meanwhile, probably never gained traction.

Scola's "candidacy" panned Wednesday morning, as his voting totals stalled and then crashed. Meanwhile, Bergoglio and Ouellet continued gaining.

During lunch that day, it's been reported that Ouellet endorsed Bergoglio. It's also been said that Bertone and Re (who represented Sodano at the conclave) also endorsed Bergoglio that moment. Sodano really liked Bergoglio during the sede vacante, as he never really tried to gain the spotlight. Bertone, meanwhile, saw the opportunity to slap the face of Scola and keep power under the new regime. After the 4th ballot, Bergoglio probably came close, and then, instead of blocking him, most Cardinals decided to show unit and backed him, putting him way over the necessary 77 votes.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Being endorsed by Bertone is certainly not a good sign... However, the fact that his major opponents were Scola and Ouellet are still huge reasons to be happy about his election.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Being endorsed by Bertone is certainly not a good sign... However, the fact that his major opponents were Scola and Ouellet are still huge reasons to be happy about his election.

I think I heard before the conclave that Scola and Bertone have a rivalry such that, whoever the anti-Scola was going to be, he was probably going to get endorsed by Bertone at some point. I'm waiting to see if Francis retains Bertone in his capacity as Cardinal Secretary of State.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Being endorsed by Bertone is certainly not a good sign... However, the fact that his major opponents were Scola and Ouellet are still huge reasons to be happy about his election.

I think I heard before the conclave that Scola and Bertone have a rivalry such that, whoever the anti-Scola was going to be, he was probably going to get endorsed by Bertone at some point. I'm waiting to see if Francis retains Bertone in his capacity as Cardinal Secretary of State.

When will we know this, BTW?

That decision will probably be the litmus test of Francis' papacy.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Being endorsed by Bertone is certainly not a good sign... However, the fact that his major opponents were Scola and Ouellet are still huge reasons to be happy about his election.

I think I heard before the conclave that Scola and Bertone have a rivalry such that, whoever the anti-Scola was going to be, he was probably going to get endorsed by Bertone at some point. I'm waiting to see if Francis retains Bertone in his capacity as Cardinal Secretary of State.

When will we know this, BTW?

That decision will probably be the litmus test of Francis' papacy.

I don't know, but I'm hoping for Hummes or Sandri (especially Hummes). They were the cardinals who appeared with Francis on the balcony after the habemus papam, and they're fellow South Americans with (at least in Sandri's case) Italian ties and diplomatic experience. Sandri has the advantage of having experience in the dicastery, but from before things went to sh**t.

ETA: Francis has apparently asked all Vatican officials to stay in their current positions for now but pointedly warned them that it may be only temporary. Conventional wisdom seems to be that he will replace Bertone at some point relatively soon, but the question is with whom.

[MaxQue]

In Quebec news, Ouellet said than Francis said he wanted him as a collaborator to him, than he needs expericence people around him, as he is totally foreign to the Curia.

He said than he believe he thinks he has the confiance of the pope to continue in his current office and than Francis made a very precise and surprising demand about his work, but than he can't say more about it right now.

[Paleobrazilian]

Being endorsed by Bertone is certainly not a good sign... However, the fact that his major opponents were Scola and Ouellet are still huge reasons to be happy about his election.

I think I heard before the conclave that Scola and Bertone have a rivalry such that, whoever the anti-Scola was going to be, he was probably going to get endorsed by Bertone at some point. I'm waiting to see if Francis retains Bertone in his capacity as Cardinal Secretary of State.

They're really huge rivals.

I think the next SoS will be Cardinal Filoni, who'd be an excellent pick. Sandri would be cool, but Francis won't take Francis 2.0 I believe. Hummes is probably too old.

[Paleobrazilian]

In Quebec news, Ouellet said than Francis said he wanted him as a collaborator to him, than he needs expericence people around him, as he is totally foreign to the Curia.

He said than he believe he thinks he has the confiance of the pope to continue in his current office and than Francis made a very precise and surprising demand about his work, but than he can't say more about it right now.

Well, some might dislike him and find him boring, but he's been doing a good job at the Congregation of Bishops. I don't see why Francis would sack him.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

In Quebec news, Ouellet said than Francis said he wanted him as a collaborator to him, than he needs expericence people around him, as he is totally foreign to the Curia.

He said than he believe he thinks he has the confiance of the pope to continue in his current office and than Francis made a very precise and surprising demand about his work, but than he can't say more about it right now.

Well, some might dislike him and find him boring, but he's been doing a good job at the Congregation of Bishops. I don't see why Francis would sack him.

Yeah, Ouellet's not actually bad at his current job, even if I think he'd be absolutely horrible as Pope or most other positions in the hierarchy.

_____

Reading up on Filoni, he seems like a great choice. And I had no idea Hummes was that old. He's older than Francis is.

[traininthedistance]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/20/world/americas/pope-francis-old-colleagues-recall-pragmatic-streak.html?hp

Apparently Bergoglio tried to convince the rest of the Argentine bishops to accept civil unions instead of going total opposition when Argentina was moving to legalize gay marriage in 2010.

I really think he's going to be pretty much the best pope we could have reasonably hoped for.

[MaxQue]

I still wonder why they voted him in.
He is quite different of the Establishment. And outsiders might be dangerous to the Establishment.

[Citizen (The) Doctor]

I still wonder why they voted him in.
He is quite different of the Establishment. And outsiders might be dangerous to the Establishment.

Maybe the college genuinely interested in turning towards the correct direction. They must have known any candidate that went so far as to fight for civil unions, even behind closed doors, is a significant departure in policy.

Or maybe it's just more shadow politics. Francis really does seem like the best kind of Pope we could hope for.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Of personal interest to me as an Anglican: The Bishop of Argentina and former Primate of the Southern Cone says that Francis had kind words about Anglicanism and doesn't think too highly of the Ordinariate poaching scheme. This makes me quite happy.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/20/world/americas/pope-francis-old-colleagues-recall-pragmatic-streak.html?hp

Apparently Bergoglio tried to convince the rest of the Argentine bishops to accept civil unions instead of going total opposition when Argentina was moving to legalize gay marriage in 2010.

I really think he's going to be pretty much the best pope we could have reasonably hoped for.

Wow, that is surprising. Maybe he thought civil unions made gay marriage less likely, but I think we have seen that isn't the case. Plenty of places have had civil unions / domestic partnerships, and either then got gay marriage, or likely soon will. In fact, in the 9th circuit court ruling of Perry vs. Brown (who clearly wasn't defending Prop. 8 ), California's domestic partnerships were successfully used as a reason for why California should have gay marriage.

[MaxQue]

I still wonder why they voted him in.
He is quite different of the Establishment. And outsiders might be dangerous to the Establishment.

Maybe the college genuinely interested in turning towards the correct direction. They must have known any candidate that went so far as to fight for civil unions, even behind closed doors, is a significant departure in policy.

Or maybe it's just more shadow politics. Francis really does seem like the best kind of Pope we could hope for.

For civil unions, I suspect most, if not all, weren't aware of that. I'm more talking of his style, which is very different than previous popes (except perhaps John Paul 1st, but I don't want to draw any paralleles between them, for obvious reasons).

[Lurker]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/20/world/americas/pope-francis-old-colleagues-recall-pragmatic-streak.html?hp

Apparently Bergoglio tried to convince the rest of the Argentine bishops to accept civil unions instead of going total opposition when Argentina was moving to legalize gay marriage in 2010.

I really think he's going to be pretty much the best pope we could have reasonably hoped for.

If this is true it makes his rabid reaction to gay marriage seem quite strange. Gay marriages are part of Satan's plan to destroy families - but civil unions are ok? Quite an unusual point of view, I would think.

[Middle-aged Europe]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/20/world/americas/pope-francis-old-colleagues-recall-pragmatic-streak.html?hp

Apparently Bergoglio tried to convince the rest of the Argentine bishops to accept civil unions instead of going total opposition when Argentina was moving to legalize gay marriage in 2010.

I really think he's going to be pretty much the best pope we could have reasonably hoped for.

If this is true it makes his rabid reaction to gay marriage seem quite strange. Gay marriages are part of Satan's plan to destroy families - but civil unions are ok? Quite an unusual point of view, I would think.

Not so much if the Gay-Satan thing is his public/official position and the civil union thing what he actually advocates behind the scenes...

[Paleobrazilian]

Many Christians feel the only problem with gay marriage is the word "marriage" - after all, marriage started as a religious sacrament that was eventually embraced by the law. So, they feel there's no problem with civil unions, because they wouldn't be playing with something that was born as a sacrament - and in many Civil Law countries, civil unions offer almost all (if not all) the legal effects marriage offers.

On to why he was elected: the electors definitely knew him, as he a leading contender in 2005. While he's a reformer, he'll in no way change the most basic teachings of the Church. And flying under the radar before the conclave and not promoting himself helped him a lot.

[Edu]

Apparently Franz Jalics (one of the 2 priests that Bergoglio supposedly denounced) issued a statement in the German Jesuits website where he categorically denies Bergoglio having any involvment in his kidnapping.
He says that at first the7y were inclined to think someone denounced them but later, in the 90's, he realised it wasn't the case (at least as far as Bergoglio is concerned).

Here is the statement in Germany, if someone could translate at least part of it, he'll be doing us a huge favor (don't really trust Google Translate )

http://www.jesuiten.org/aktuelles/details/article/erganzende-erklarung-von-pater-franz-jalics-sj.html



By the way, I don't really know what Al thinks of this, but the last couple of pages aren't really about the election, so I suppose we should move to the International discussion subforum. I defer the decision to more experienced posters and the moderator of course.

[Antonio the Sixth]

By the way, I don't really know what Al thinks of this, but the last couple of pages aren't really about the election, so I suppose we should move to the International discussion subforum. I defer the decision to more experienced posters and the moderator of course.

Aren't the most recent posts speculations on how the vote went and why the cardinals voted the way they did? That seems to fit the board rather well.

Of course there is bound to be discussions that exceed the strict frame of the election, but calling them off-topic is a bit of a stretch.