namelesstavern.net

by **Ganzo** » Thu Apr 21, 2005 10:01 am

Yes i've read his bio before. Now are we comparing apples to apples? If we are than comparing Sharon to pope is retarded, you should compare him to Bush. We do not have Church of Judaism Leader, or Big Boss Rabi. Last spiritual leader of Judaism was Akiva and i'll be happy to compare them.

Remember this is not tit for tat game, i have nothing against Pope, i just think after last guy this was a wrong choise

by **Guest** » Thu Apr 21, 2005 10:10 am

My point is solely he's a good man. I don't think he should be defamed for enforced nationalistit registration <which he fought> and conscription <which he also fought>.

He's a caretaker and essentially identical to John Paul II. I'll be interested to see what his first moves are. While he wasn't my pick, the Cardinals chose him for a reason.

by **Narrock** » Thu Apr 21, 2005 10:28 am

The Cardinals chose Ratzinger because of his dedication the RCC and her dogma, his intellect, and his contributions to promoting peace.

by **Martrae** » Thu Apr 21, 2005 10:55 am

He's a transitional pope. He's there to buffer John Paul II from the next 'real' pope.

by **Narrock** » Thu Apr 21, 2005 11:54 am

Transitional Pope? I never read or heard anything about that. Where did you come up with that idea?

by **Gidan** » Thu Apr 21, 2005 1:38 pm

Transitional as in. Hmmm we dont really have a great candidate at this moment but we really need a new pope. Hey this guy wont be around much longer and is in a high enough position. Make him the pope and While we wait on him to die, we will look at all the other cadidates very closely and find the long term pope we really want.

Not official of course but its always possible.This is what I get out of that statment atleast.

by **Narrock** » Thu Apr 21, 2005 2:31 pm

When they choose a new Pope out of a possible 1000 or so candidates... they're not choosing an "interim" Pope. That would be stupid, and a complete waste of time. Imo.

by **Martrae** » Thu Apr 21, 2005 2:31 pm

Why do you think they chose an older man instead of a young one? They could have just as easily picked someone 56 again.

Besides all the news outlets were saying they would pick an old guy as a transitional pope. And lookee...that's just what they did.

by **KILL** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 7:18 am

OH NOE

by **araby** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 7:34 am

Hell, not only that, his assistant is the same age or a little older even.

by **Spacewoman Spiff** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 8:48 am

I don't know if transitional pope is the right word... more that Pope JP was very young for a pope when he was elected. He was also a very revolutionary pope and made a fuckload of changes to the Catholic Church during his tenure. The pope council doesn't want another pope right away that will be around for another 30 years to make huge changes like before, they want a nice stable pope that will be around for about 5-6 years.

Hence, the old guy.

Pope. Pope pope pope. Hee! Pope is a fun word.

by **Mop** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 8:49 am

the new pope has his email set up, so I am going to put him on my email list np

by **Spacewoman Spiff** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 8:56 am

OH you should send him a .gif of the kitten dangling from a branch by his paw and the caption says "Hang in there!"

by **Mop** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 8:57 am

I think that would have been better for the last pope, no?

by **Spacewoman Spiff** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 8:57 am

by **Narrock** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 9:40 am

Martrae wrote:Why do you think they chose an older man instead of a young one? They could have just as easily picked someone 56 again.

Besides all the news outlets were saying they would pick an old guy as a transitional pope. And lookee...that's just what they did.

All the news groups? ROFL

Your opinion was the first "transitional" Pope theory I've heard.

by **shiraz** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 10:51 am

I heard the transitional pope theory in several places also....maybe CNN or NYTimes, I wasn't really paying attention.

by **Martrae** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:14 am

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2005 ... next_x.htm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4462723.stm

http://www.kyw1060.com/news_archives_de ... emid=45471

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/04/ ... 4801.shtml

News outlets not groups, you moron.

by **Gypsiyee** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:41 am

I dono Mart, I don't see Fox listed there

by **Martrae** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:45 am

LOL

How's this?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,153995,00.html

by **Narrock** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 1:05 pm

Martrae wrote:LOL

How's this?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,153995,00.html

LOL there is nothing in that article about Ratzinger being an interim Pope you dufus.

by **Martrae** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 1:33 pm

Benedict turned 78 on Saturday, the oldest pope elected since Clement XII in 1730. His age clearly was a factor among cardinals who favored a "transitional" pope who could skillfully lead the church as it absorbs John Paul II's legacy, rather than a younger cardinal who could wind up with another long pontificate.

From that link.

by **Eziekial** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 1:44 pm

You know, if you beat someone long enough, they lose sensation in that area and any further beatings to that spot are pretty useless. I wonder if we've rendered Mindia mind numb?

by **Aavar** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 2:07 pm

by **Narrock** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 3:22 pm

Didn't read that part. heh

So, sorry for calling you a dufus.

namelesstavern.net

Pope has been chosen

Who is online