Remember I'm skeptical when it comes to the Catholic church Sby. I would like to see if he continues with what I'd call a modest and humble lifestyle, but absolute power corrupts absolutely and some people will go to great lengths to get that power.

Remember, this is the guy that gave up a palace, a limousine, a helicopter, etc.

He reminds me of John Paul I, except for the "dead in a month" part.

We hope. Though there was a lot of things suspicious in John Paul I's death if you're into conspiracy theories at all.

@ Draug

I have a lot of disdain for the Church leadership, yes. I have been consistant in this. I wouldn't do our Mods the disservice of comparing them to such people.

Not really. Honestly, I think that they got the wrong guy, and they got a notification of their error. Thats all. Remember, John Paul II was exceptional.

@Octavious - you wrote "The driving force behind being a profesional footballer is a love of football and a talent for the game."

What if the driving force behind being a professional pope is a love for God and the church and a talent for spirtually shepherding people?

Well first of all, Octavious, the notable such palaces are in the Vatican City, which is an independent state ruled by the pope. It's also very small. Are you suggesting that they sell the most prominent house in the Vatican city to a vastly wealthy private individual, and then just try to run the city around him and his lifestyle? That doesn't seem potentially problematic to you?

@ Flem

Ah, that is the important difference. The only real route for someone with a love of football and a talent for the game is professional footballer. People with a love of God and a talent for giving spiritual advice have many paths. The most humble of those paths is that of a monk, living a simple life of prayer and offering aid to those who ask it. The least humble of those is absolute ruler of the Vatican City State, the definer of morality for hundreds of millions, and Father of all Catholics.

@ semck

The Vatican palaces are a stone around their necks that they cannot shift. It was built in an age of greed when the Church ruled by fear and intimidation. Would the Church be far better off if they didn't have that revolting collection of expensive masionary as their HQ? Most certainly. Can they get rid of it? Nope.

What they can do is sell off the collection of palaces and grand houses that make up their regional HQs. They could easily (relatively) find buyers for them, it would vastly reduce their running costs and fill up their war chest for carrying out God's work.

In much the same way, as it happens, that many nation states are selling off their grand embassy buildings and replacing them with far cheaper and more useful offices.

@ Octavious

"The only real route for someone with a love of football and a talent for the game is professional footballer."

Not at all, there are high school football coaches and little league coaches (and their soccer equivalents) all over the world that get little but give much. One doesn't have to be a professional to love the game.

Regardless the quality of humility is a human quality. While it might be correct that certain folk may be drawn to certain occupations on average.

It is hardly the case that ONLY a specific type of person will be drawn to certain occupations for ONLY a specific set of motivations.

@ Octavious - again, you're equating humility with anonymity, which is not a synonym of humility. You are also disregarding the reality that *leadership* is an ability/skill/gift that can *not* be practiced anonymously.

I know this is crazy, but I'm actually going to reference a couple of Bible verses here, since we are talking about a religous leader.

"We have different gifts, according to the grace given us....if it is leadership, let him govern diligently." Romans 12:8 If a person has a leadership gift and refuses to use it, that's not humility, it's disobedience to God.

"It was [Christ] who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers...." Ephesians 4:11 Again, if Christ himself has given a person a gift, it's not humility to not use the gift.

"And in the church God has appointed first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers...." 1 Corinthians 12:28 And yet again, if someone has been appointed to leadership by God, how in God's name can it be humility to refuse?

Humility is about character, not position. That's my final definition and I'm sticking to it, with a final word on the matter from the apostle Paul who, I would guess, the current pope would aspire to emulate: "What, after all, is Apolllos? And what is Paul? Only servants through whom you came to believe - as the Lord has assigned to each his task." 1 Corinthians 3:5

Anyway, I think you're making some pretty strong points about how the RCC could use it's wealth to further the cause of Christ in the world, but you're obscuring your case with ad hominem attacks against a man you don't know and, in fact, never heard of until yesterday (okay, maybe you heard of him last election, but I'm pretty sure that doesn't qualify you to judge his personal character).

@ Flem

Where is the attack? I am not saying he is a bad Pope or a bad man because of a lack of humility. I have said several times that I don't see humility as a trait of a good Pope. I agree totally that humility is about character, but maintain that the character traits one needs in order to achieve the position of Pope are not compatible humility. One cannot be a model without being vain, one cannot be a soldier and be repulsed by violence, one cannot be a surgeon and full of self doubt, one cannot be a Pope and be humble.


@ CA

"Not at all, there are high school football coaches and little league coaches (and their soccer equivalents) all over the world that get little but give much. One doesn't have to be a professional to love the game."

Little league coaches etc love the game but don't have the talent. If they loved the game and had the talent they would all be pro-footballers and not coaches.

"It is hardly the case that ONLY a specific type of person will be drawn to certain occupations for ONLY a specific set of motivations"

It really is the case. Depending on what the job is the range of motivations and types of people who apply can vary hugely in size and scope, of course. Consider the investment banker. Find me a humble one and I will give you a biscuit (retired investment bankers don't count. I accept that people change).

Consider also the Diplomacy player and forum user. Find me one who isn't opinionated and arrogant. You might come across ones who say they aren't, or even try pretty hard not to be, but ones who genuinely aren't? Few and far between.

I think I may be the only one ;)

@Oct - What can I say but your arrogance and judgmental attitude makes me want to puke. High school coaches may very well have had the talent but blew out a knee or otherwise got hurt in college or their early pro career. I know a pitcher who used to play for the Clearwater Phillies and was on his way up to the majors who tore his rotator cuff and couldn't recover from it, so now he coaches high school and little league baseball.

And you can make your assertions that only a specific type of person will be drawn to certain positions and they will be drawn for specific reasons, but seeing as you can't prove a negative (that others might not be drawn for different reasons) and you can never truly prove motive, you are simply wrong. 'Nuf said.

@ Draug

What are you on about? A chap in highschool has a love of football and exceptional talent based on his speed, quick wittedness and abilities to throw and catch etc. He is on route to pro-football. He then has an accident that buggers up his knee. He can no longer run, therefore he has lost the talent required to play pro-football. He has the love of the game, he now lacks the talent to play it at the highest level, he becomes a coach.

How can you find my attitude makes you puke when you agree with it???

Oh, and to show you just how wrong you are (and because you can disprove a negative by simpoly providing one example), I present to you Congressman (and personal friend) Thomas "Tom" N. Kindness. He gave me my appointment to West Point and a recommendation to the Coast Gurad Academy (becaus eht eCoast Guard doesn't take appointments).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Kindness

Tom's reason for getting into politics was to make a difference. He was the least egocentric person I knew short of a couple Lutheran ministers and lay people. Unassuming and unpretentious, he worked behind the scenes to improve our way of life, never wanting the glory and fame of the spotlight.

I had high hopes for John Boehner (another man who I know fairly well) but I knew his ego would eventually get the better of him if he got beyond the local level and, well, I think it's pretty obvious that Washington changed him, not the other way around.

But not Tom. Nope, Washington never changed him. He stayed humble and concerned about the people his entire political career.

And I'm sure you are saying "yeah right, you knew them". Some day I will scan the newspaper clippings from my West Point appointment and Coast Guard recommendation and post a link to it here. My mom ran the Butler County (Oh) Republican PArty HQ when I was in middle school and high school and worked for several of the Republican politicians in Butler County as a staff member when they got elected. I know the best and worst of them. Including *the* worst Michael A. Fox - most corrupt man I've ever had the dishonor of knowing. Hell, he was even worse than Steve "Smiling Bob" Warshak who I graduated high school with.

@Oct - perhaps we're simply using different definitions of humility...but I think yours is wrong :-)

You assume that a religious leader is not humble while a quiet monk is. But why couldn't the monk be sitting in his monestary thinking, "I'm better than all those cardinals and bishops. If they were *real* followers of Jesus they'd be out here with me living in misery, devoted to prayer. I sure am glad I'm not *arrogant* like those *other* so-called church leaders."

See? Arrogance and humility has nothing to do with position, it has to do with attitude.

Also, consider you lize in a world overrun by zombies. Every zombie you have ever seen (and there have been a lot) have tried to eat your brains. Can you prove all zombies will try to eat your brains? No. Do you scarper as soon as you see a zombie approaching you and you have no means of defending yourself? Yes.

Why? Because in the real world you don't have to prove things beyond all doubt. Beyond reasonable doubt is fine.

OK, I will grant a misunderstanding on my part on the talent thing. I thought you meant they never had the talent when that isn't true. But it is true he ceased to have the talent when he destroyed his shoulder. Although he could still put on the heat as I saw him throw a 101 MPH pitch at one of those radar gun "guess your speed" booths at a company picnic (his wife worked with me in IT), but then he had to ice down the shoulder and regretted it for a week.

First, zombies aren't people. For one, they aren't real. For two, their mindlessly motivated for one purpose. People are creatures with working brains: emotions and motivations. I can expect an automaton to do very specific things and expect a similar automaton to do similar things. But not people. If you run your life based around expecting people to do very specific things, you will either be disappointed if you are an optomist or surprised if a pessimist on a regular basis. People can and will surprise you. What motivates each of us is different and unique.

@ Flem

There may well be a monk who considers the monestry the pinnacle of religious achievement and who is even less humble than I am. That is a real possibility. But I don't think there has ever been a Pope who consideres being Pope anything other than the top job.

@ Draug

I happen to consider personal accounts to be rather strong evidence when given by people with a reputation for honesty and a decent head on their sholders. There is a chance Tom has simply pulled the wool over your eyes (as lots of politicians have to many people) but I'd say this was unlikely. You may well have found an exception.

Still, all the politicans I have met have not been humble. I will modify my view to saying there is a remote chance this Pope may be humble. I will need a lot of evidence to convince me though, and what I've heard so far doesn't do it.

@ Oct - there may be a chance that I am more familiar than you with religious leadership and religious people in general. Trust me, there are a lot of motivations for monastic living, and humility isn't always highest on the list. And again, trust me, the "top job" isn't always an enviable position, and arrogance doesn't always top the list of reasons why someone would want the top job.

"when given by people with a reputation for honesty and a decent head on their sholders."

I hope I fall in this category. :-) I only lie in game to get what I want. Or sometimes here to stir the pot (mostly about 17 year old girkls and shit like that).

Here's something I sort of wonder about: why do non-Catholics feel entitled to criticize someone's ability to lead the Catholic church? I ask this as a non-Catholic myself. What bearing does the identity, character, or belief structure of the pontiff have on your life if you don't follow his teachings? Does it impact your life in any way, or would you be criticizing no matter who was selected?

@ hecks

The Pope is a world leader and as such has an influence on the lives of everyone to some degree. For the British the Pope plays an important role in Northern Ireland in particular. If this turns out to be a poor Pope he may also be inclined to play a part in the Faulklands issue, but hopefully this will not be the case. Also, we all live in a global village and there are global problems that have to be tackled on an international basis over which the Pope has a huge influence (the spread of AIDs being an obvious example.

In short everyone should pay attention to who becomes Pope.

@ Draug: Yes you do. Don't let it go to your head ;)

@Oct
You really think the Pope has that much power in secular affairs?

ROct is correct, He may be a religious leader, but his role puts him as the leader of over 1 billion people and those 1 billion people have a serious impact on the world. He actually holds sway over more people leaders of Russia, the US and all of the EU combined.

I don't know... most of the Catholics I know are the birth-control-using, name-in-vain-taking, pope-ignoring, gay-marriage-supporting, pick-and-choosing type. Maybe I just come from particularly secular region, but even most of the Catholics I know don't really pay that much attention to what the pope says.