What gives you reason to be optimistic?
I think that several of the most eligible cardinals are, while not 'perfect', more than capable of continuing on the correct trajectory, even ramping up the efforts to bring back Tradition. I am perhaps not quite as... I guess I will say 'radical', a traditionalist as many on this board, so for me, simply staying on Benedict's course would be acceptable for the time being.
That is not to say that I think Benedict's pontificate has been perfect. Clearly, for a traditionalist, it has not, but I truly believe we are going in the right direction. I think someone like Ouellet would stay on precisely the same course. But an outside chance like Burke or Ranjith would be a watershed moment for traditionalism. I mean, look at what Ranjith did in Colombo, forbidding Communion in the hand, mandating altar rails, rejecting syncretic liturgies... If that is not a step in the right direction...
Part of it is personality too. I am usually an optimist.
Please detail a list of who these imperfect Cardinals are and how they are going to right the avalanche of wrongs of the past 50 years. And I do not understand what a radical traditionalist is? Please explain that.
No pope has been perfect. But some Popes have done a good job of Poping. What would you consider the correct trajectory that corresponds with a St. Pius X or Blessed Pius IX?
Thank you.
I could not think of a better word at the time than radical, but I did not think it was adequate either. Hence the scare quotes.
Very briefly, I am in a rather unique (for me) position on this forum in that, by the standards of most people here, I am actually the 'liberal', relatively speaking. Normally I am the token rad trad. That is new for me.
So all I mean by that is that I more or less adhere to the FSSP party line, with great sympathy towards the SSPX. On the other hand, we have several members here who accept sedevacantism, which I think you and I would both agree makes me look rather tame in comparison.
In terms of staying on the right course, my thoughts are like this. I think Ouellet would be qualitatively identical to Pope Benedict, and I personally would be content with that. I am not as familiar with Scola, but it seems that evidence indicates that he is rather in the same boat. IMO there are more things that Pope Benedict could have done for Tradition, but all in all I think we are taking slow steps in the right direction, in part due to his leadership. I know many people around here disagree with that, which is fine.
I think that Burke and Ranjith would step up the efforts, even significantly. That is why, by how I understand the papabili, I am considering either of them to be ideal. I think they would take Pope Benedict's efforts and expand them, giving us traditionalists something even greater to hold onto. Again, that is only my opinion.
I do not think any of the candidates would be 'perfect' in that they would immediately restore the usus antiquior as normative, suppress the Novus Ordo, and unconditionally regularize the SSPX. But that is fine. I do not want to perfect to be the enemy of the good, in this case.
So in conclusion, I think the cardinals who would do the best job of "Poping" would be, in descending order, Ranjith, Burke, Ouellet, and Scola. I think they would do a good and acceptable job, though perhaps not perfect in the way that I would perceive to be perfect.
I hope that explains my thoughts better.
