Brandmüller on future papal conclaves: less voters, more options

[Christina_S]

I came across this interesting piece today and thought I'd share it to stir the pot.

http://magister.blogautore.espresso.repubblica.it/2021/10/26/fewer-electors-and-more-candidates-the-conclave-of-cardinal-brandmuller%e2%80%99s-dreams/

He calls for bringing the number of cardinals back down to 70, as set by Sixtus V, and I think he's got a point: JPII in particular went too far in messing with the game when he created so many new cardinals and raised the ceiling to 120. The argument could be made that the universal Church needs to be represented by the electors, but Brandmüller retains the "representation" aspect by stating that you don't necessarily need to be a cardinal to be elected pope. Bishop Joe Trad could be picked from some random corner of the world.

To be perfectly realistic, I think the next conclave will be a disaster and someone worse than Francis will be elected. But hypothetically, let's play with these ideas. Do you think Brandmüller is onto something? 

[ChairmanJoeAintMyPrez]

To be perfectly realistic, I think the next conclave will be a disaster and someone worse than Francis will be elected.

Diabolical disorientation is waking up a lot of lukewarms.

How many here have increased their acts of reparation post-Pachamama?

[trentcath]

I came across this interesting piece today and thought I'd share it to stir the pot.

http://magister.blogautore.espresso.repubblica.it/2021/10/26/fewer-electors-and-more-candidates-the-conclave-of-cardinal-brandmuller%e2%80%99s-dreams/

He calls for bringing the number of cardinals back down to 70, as set by Sixtus V, and I think he's got a point: JPII in particular went too far in messing with the game when he created so many new cardinals and raised the ceiling to 120. The argument could be made that the universal Church needs to be represented by the electors, but Brandmüller retains the "representation" aspect by stating that you don't necessarily need to be a cardinal to be elected pope. Bishop Joe Trad could be picked from some random corner of the world.

To be perfectly realistic, I think the next conclave will be a disaster and someone worse than Francis will be elected. But hypothetically, let's play with these ideas. Do you think Brandmüller is onto something?

Didn't it used to be the rule, a long time ago, that only Italian bishops (what this means pre-Italy is I suppose Bishops of a see in what is now Italy) were made Cardinals? The rules then got more and more relaxed and you ended up with Cardinals as some sort of geographical representation of the Church with each cardinal representing a constituency etc... I am not sure whether reducing or increasing the number of cardinals will do anything in and of itself though, the issue is whether the reduced or increased number of cardinals are perverts or Catholics or not.

[MaximGun]

How many here have increased their acts of reparation post-Pachamama?

My guess, not very many.

Most Catholics are so poorly catechized they don't know what reparation is.

How many don't eat meat on Fridays and has that number increased post-Pachamama?

[ChairmanJoeAintMyPrez]

How many here have increased their acts of reparation post-Pachamama?

My guess, not very many.

Most Catholics are so poorly catechized they don't know what reparation is.

How many don't eat meat on Fridays and has that number increased post-Pachamama?

Well, I intended to ask how many here have increased their acts of reparation.  My mistake if the question about reparation was confused with the reference to lukewarms.

It's going to take a lot more than pachamama to wake up the circlechurch "all are welcome" types.

[Christina_S]

I came across this interesting piece today and thought I'd share it to stir the pot.

http://magister.blogautore.espresso.repubblica.it/2021/10/26/fewer-electors-and-more-candidates-the-conclave-of-cardinal-brandmuller%e2%80%99s-dreams/

He calls for bringing the number of cardinals back down to 70, as set by Sixtus V, and I think he's got a point: JPII in particular went too far in messing with the game when he created so many new cardinals and raised the ceiling to 120. The argument could be made that the universal Church needs to be represented by the electors, but Brandmüller retains the "representation" aspect by stating that you don't necessarily need to be a cardinal to be elected pope. Bishop Joe Trad could be picked from some random corner of the world.

To be perfectly realistic, I think the next conclave will be a disaster and someone worse than Francis will be elected. But hypothetically, let's play with these ideas. Do you think Brandmüller is onto something?

Didn't it used to be the rule, a long time ago, that only Italian bishops (what this means pre-Italy is I suppose Bishops of a see in what is now Italy) were made Cardinals? The rules then got more and more relaxed and you ended up with Cardinals as some sort of geographical representation of the Church with each cardinal representing a constituency etc... I am not sure whether reducing or increasing the number of cardinals will do anything in and of itself though, the issue is whether the reduced or increased number of cardinals are perverts or Catholics or not.

Not sure if they had to be Italian. It would make sense, given that the pope is firstly Bishop of Rome.

This snippet talks about the development of the number of cardinals: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardinal_(Catholic_Church)#Numbers

I agree: even if we had less cardinals but they all turned out to be homos, the situation would still suck. But maybe there would be less room to play politics and more pressure to actually believe and follow the promptings of the Holy Spirit 

[Christina_S]

How many here have increased their acts of reparation post-Pachamama?

My guess, not very many.

Most Catholics are so poorly catechized they don't know what reparation is.

How many don't eat meat on Fridays and has that number increased post-Pachamama?

Among trads, I'd say it has increased. Among the rest? You're absolutely right.

My husband and I were talking about asceticism the other night and how if it's done right, it brings a sense of joy because you're intentionally mortifying yourself with the intention of drawing closer to God. Acts of penance and reparation need to be practised regularly. If you save it just for Lent or just for Friday because you dread doing it, it'll suck. Yet this is the state of modern, NO Catholicism: "penance" is done in Lent and only Lent (Easter people, doncha know), and it consists of the wimpiest things like giving up cream in coffee or donating some spare change to the (highly suspect) Development & Peace fundraiser.

Back on the topic of cardinals though, I found an interesting tidbit on cardinals in pectore. They're basically named cardinals by the pope but only the two of them know it.

From the reign of Martin V, i. e. from the end of the Western Schism, during which there were many cardinals created by the contending popes, it became customary for the pope to create cardinals without declaring their names (creati et reservati in pectore), the Italian equivalent for which is in petto. The publication of the names may, in given circumstances, be made at a much later date.

Source: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Catholic_Encyclopedia_(1913)/Cardinal
I had no idea about this, but man, this is such a weapon lol

[lauermar]

How can they make reparation for Pachamama if they don't go to confession for their own sins.

[ChairmanJoeAintMyPrez]

How can they make reparation for Pachamama if they don't go to confession for their own sins.

Like promoting abortion-tainted experimental potions?

[LausTibiChriste]

How can they make reparation for Pachamama if they don't go to confession for their own sins.

Like promoting abortion-tainted experimental potions?

ThEyRe NoT iN tHe VacCiNe, ThEy'Re OnLy UsEd FoR tEsTiNg So SoMeHoW iTs Ok

[Prayerful]

Maybe it could be reduced to the SQPR, that is Roman aristos like the Fragipani or Colonna, their heavies, priests of the Roman basilicas and whoever was in the Lateran Square. The outcome couldn't be worse. Even the Pope who put the corpse of Formosus on trial managed without promoting heresy and indifferentism.,

[Santantonio]

Not only do I agree with him, but back in 2018 I posted about it here. I hope you all read what he wrote.
The Roman Church is Universal, not the other way around!:

Back to the basics: has titularism ruined the mark of Roman primacy?
https://www.suscipedomine.com/forum/index.php?topic=21132.0

[Christina_S]

How can they make reparation for Pachamama if they don't go to confession for their own sins.

You make a good point. The whole sacramental gamut is essential to rebuilding the Church.

One of the great marks of my old parish was the lengthy confession line-up every Saturday and Sunday. That right there is a sign of health.