Pope dies of the flu

[Nicole]

This borders on future history, but what if, instead of recovering as he seems to be right now, Pope John Paul II died of the flu he got several days ago? Who would be the most likely candidate for a new pope?

 

[Tom_B]

Archbishop of Milan

The main split in the next conclave will be more geographical than theological.
The Italians want desperately to regain the Papacy and will rally behind Dionigi Cardinal Tettamanzi, the Archbishop of Milan. Their big worry is that the Latin American cardinals will form a bloc. That may happen but there is no single obvious candidate from there and I think the Italians will succeed this time.

Tettamanzi will likely call himself John Paul III (I find the double name stupid).
He will try to get more involved with the American priest scandal but his main priority will be to try to reinvigorate the Catholic Church in Italy and to a lesser degree the rest of Western Europe.

Oridnation of women: zero chance

Artificial contraception: 10% chance that he will eventually devise some loophole workaround that it's sinful in most circumstances but reluctantly permissible in extreme circumstances

Priestly celibacy: 60% chance he retains current policy. 10% he permits married men to become priests in the Wesern Rite (some Uniates already can).
This does not add up to 100%. The other 30% is that he permits married deacons to become priests after say 15 years of "extraordinary service" (which soon become 10 years without a scandal).

JPIII will travel but not as much as JPII because some think the Polish Pope had too much of a Personality Cult.

Tom

 

[Kadyet]

Old saying about papal elections and trying to guess the next pope: "He who walks into the conclave a pope, walks out a cardinal."

I'm rooting for Cardinal Arinze myself. It'll be nice to get some strict discipline in the Church again and liturgical abuses curbed.

 

[Kadyet]

Artificial contraception: 10% chance that he will eventually devise some loophole workaround that it's sinful in most circumstances but reluctantly permissible in extreme circumstances

It's a good way of getting him deposed as an anti-pope and heretic. Not very useful otherwise.

Priestly celibacy: 60% chance he retains current policy. 10% he permits married men to become priests in the Wesern Rite (some Uniates already can).
This does not add up to 100%. The other 30% is that he permits married deacons to become priests after say 15 years of "extraordinary service" (which soon become 10 years without a scandal).

Won't happen. Theoretically possible, but it would cause a lot of traditionalists and conservatives to break away, and kill any chance of healing the SSPX schism. The FSSP would leave again as well. The closest you'll get is creation of an Anglican use rite sui iruis church that allows married Anglican priests to become Catholic priests (there's about a hundred of them in the Latin Church right now, it requires a papal dispensation).

 

[reformer]

Another major question is how traditional the church will remain, or will it become more liberal (religiously, not politicaly). Many protestant chrches, such as the congregationalist (its hard to believe they used to be Puritans) have in many ways abandoned traditional religion in exchange for popular modern ideas. The Unitarians have taken this to an exstreme. I really hope that the Vatican won't head down that road.

 

[Kadyet]

It'll swing more towards conservatism.

 

[Adamanteus]

I find it amusing that people discuss the Vatican as if it has any real power or influence anymore. Even in predominantly Catholic nations, few people heed its tenets completely. Considering the number of apologies it has had to make in the last few years (acknowledging evolution to be legitimate, acknowledging Galileo as correct, admitting its vices in the treatment of Jews during the Middle Ages etc), and that the apology that it will surely make about the molestations of young boys, I can't see its prestige improving any time soon.

I actually find it curious that the Pope even chooses to render judgements on certain topics, such as contraception. He could've simply not rendered an opinion, but instead chose to alienate millions of Catholics.

One way or the other, future Pope's are going to have to accept certain changes in society, because not only do they have no choice, but they risk becoming obsolete by denying it.

 

[zoomar]

Another major question is how traditional the church will remain, or will it become more liberal (religiously, not politicaly). Many protestant chrches, such as the congregationalist (its hard to believe they used to be Puritans) have in many ways abandoned traditional religion in exchange for popular modern ideas. The Unitarians have taken this to an exstreme. I really hope that the Vatican won't head down that road.

I dont think anyone need worry about that, even if a liberal western European or American cardinal gets selected, God forbid. The Catholic Church is still the Catholic Church, not a bunch of agnostics to scared to admit it openly. Although I'm not a Roman Catholic (I'm Anglican ECUSA), I have always admired John Paul II's unflinching internal consistency on the so-called "sanctity of life issues", which are not comforting to political liberals OR conservatives. On the other hand, I think the Church does need to address the increasingly disfunctional limitation of the priesthood to celibate males by either allowing female priests, married priets, or both.