Cardinal Bernard Francis Law of Boston turns 80 on Friday November 4. The passing of his birthday marks a turning point because he loses his voting power in the event of a papal conclave. The number of elector cardinals then drops to 112. Cardinal Law will then join the 80 other non-voting cardinals.
Cardinal Law has served as the Archpriest of Rome's Basilica of Saint Mary Major since 2004. In 1985 Pope John Paul II made him a cardinal. In 2005 he participated in the conclave that elected Joseph Ratzinger as pope.
vrijdag 4 november 2011
dinsdag 25 oktober 2011
Time to start worrying about the Pope's health?
Last week I advised CWN readers not to waste time worrying about the news that Pope Benedict was towed down the aisle on a rolling platform when he celebrated Mass in St. Peter’s basilica. It was obviously a concession to his advanced age, I said, but apparently nothing more.
This week brought a new report: The Pope is no longer scheduling one-on-one visits with the bishops making their ad limina visits. OK, you can start worrying now.
There’s a perfectly plausible reason for the latest change in policy: to lighten the Pope’s schedule. Instead of a series of quick, rushed meetings with each of the visiting diocesan bishops, the Pope has decided to hold longer, more broad-ranging sessions with several bishops at a time. There’s nothing inherently alarming about the change. But coming just after the re-introduction of the rolling platform (which we know all too well from its use during the last years of Blessed John Paul II), it’s a clear indication that Vatican officials are on a drive to save the Pope’s energy—presumably because the physical demands of his work are taking their toll.
This is not a call to panic. There is no indication that the Holy Father is suffering from any severe ailment. But he is 84 now, and his health has never been robust. Even if simple fatigue is the main problem now, more serious problems may be coming soon.
(Phil Lawler, CatholicCulture.org)
This week brought a new report: The Pope is no longer scheduling one-on-one visits with the bishops making their ad limina visits. OK, you can start worrying now.
There’s a perfectly plausible reason for the latest change in policy: to lighten the Pope’s schedule. Instead of a series of quick, rushed meetings with each of the visiting diocesan bishops, the Pope has decided to hold longer, more broad-ranging sessions with several bishops at a time. There’s nothing inherently alarming about the change. But coming just after the re-introduction of the rolling platform (which we know all too well from its use during the last years of Blessed John Paul II), it’s a clear indication that Vatican officials are on a drive to save the Pope’s energy—presumably because the physical demands of his work are taking their toll.
This is not a call to panic. There is no indication that the Holy Father is suffering from any severe ailment. But he is 84 now, and his health has never been robust. Even if simple fatigue is the main problem now, more serious problems may be coming soon.
(Phil Lawler, CatholicCulture.org)
zaterdag 1 oktober 2011
The consistory and the Italian puzzle
2012 will see the celebration of the fourth creation of new cardinals of Pope Benedict XVI's pontificate. The fourth Consistory of Pope Benedict XVI for the creation of new cardinals will be a puzzle not easily solved. In the last few days there have been persistent rumors in the Vatican that the Pontiff was about to announce a new "batch" of red caps, to celebrate the consistory on the Feast of Christ the King in November, as happened last year.
The idea, however, seems definitely to have waned, though technically there is still time: generally, a month passes between the announcement of a consistory and its celebration. It seems more likely that the creation of new "princes of the Church" will take place in 2012: in February or June. Currently, there are 113 cardinals with right of entry to the conclave (and thus, there are seven vacancies), and there will be 110 by year-end: a consistory in November could therefore provide a dozen new cardinals under eighty. In February 2012, there will be 12 seats available (and there could even be a consistory with as many as fifteen new voting cardinals), while in June the number of posts would increase to 18. Finally, in November 2012, a consistory could be held that would create 25 new cardinals.
One problem will be the high number of Italians. Of the 13 cardinals who will turn eighty in 2012, thereby forfeiting the right to enter the conclave, only one, Renato Raffaele Martino, is Italian. And, compared with only one Italian exiting the college of voters, at least four or five are expected to enter, increasing the Italian patrol in the most exclusive club in the world, the voters who elect the Pope.
There are already two archbishops residing in our country that are waiting for the cardinal's hat: Giuseppe Betori, of Florence, who missed his turn in the preceding consistory, and Cesare Nosiglia of Turin, who was also nominated before the creation of cardinals in November 2011. To these two, should the consistory be held in June, one must add the new patriarch of Venice, the successor of Cardinal Angelo Scola, moved to Milan, whose appointment is expected early next year.
The last consistory rigidly and categorically applied the rule of not including on the list residing archbishops whose predecessor emeritus is under eighty, and therefore voting in the conclave, even if this cardinal had been recalled to the Roman Curia. It will be interesting to see how things will proceed concerning these and other important episcopal sees whose occupants are traditionally elevated to the cardinalate. If the rule were to be re-applied, it would exclude Florence and Turin again, as well as Toledo, Philadelphia, Mechelen-Brussels, Los Angeles, Santiago de Chile, Rio de Janeiro and Quebec. Among the paradoxes of such a strict application of the rule, is the case of Toledo: the current archbishop, Braulio Rodríguez Plaza, at 67 ½ is older than his predecessor, Cardinal Antonio Cañizares Llovera, who turns 66 in two weeks, called to Rome as Prefect of Divine Worship. This means that, in theory Rodríguez Plaza would never have the chance to enter the college of cardinals.
But the overcrowding of Italian candidates for the red hat comes above all from the Roman Curia. In fact, scarlet awaits the Prefect of Propaganda Fide, Fernando Filoni; the president of the Administration of Patrimony of the Apostolic See (APSA), Domenico Calcagno; the new president of the Governorate, Giuseppe Bertello and finally the new president of the Prefecture for Economic Affairs of the Holy See, Giuseppe Versaldi (the latter was appointed to lead the "Vatican Court of Auditors", but did not leave the diocese, where he got permission to stay for a few months, doing double duty as a result of pastoral projects undertaken by him). As one can see, there are already four, to which could be added Archbishop Francesco Coccopalmerio, President of the Pontifical Council for the interpretation of legislative texts (and possible candidate to head the Apostolic Penitentiary); and in view of the Synod on the new evangelization, also the President of the Pontifical Council by the same name wanted by Pope Ratzinger, Archbishop Rino Fisichella.
In the Roman Curia, the only non-Italian to be taken for sure is the Brazilian Joao Braz de Aviz, Prefect of the Congregation for Religious. As one can see, the Italians, and the curial Italians, this time, too, could make up the lion's share, laying claim to a large part of the new posts in the consistory. There is also expectancy to see how Latin America will fare, penalized last consistory.
Some are hoping that certain heads of curial offices will have to wait a turn, as happens nowadays with the large archbishoprics in the world. Benedict XVI, unlike his predecessor, is keen not to exceed the number of 120 cardinal electors established in his days by Paul VI. And although consistories for the creation of cardinals are events totally dependent on the will of the Pope - who is accountable to no one for his choices, preferences and exclusions - a certain balance has always been sought in formulating the list of new cardinals, including persons coming from various continents and from Churches who are suffering for various reasons, as well as pastors who have distinguished themselves by their courageous witness.
At one time the Roman Curia was composed almost entirely of Italians and there is also, according to several scholars of church history, an "Italian vocation" to the Curia. While it was Pius XII and his extraordinary creation of cardinals in 1946 that gave a decisive boost to the internationalization of the College of Cardinals, it was above all with Paul VI that the Roman Curia was opened to the world.
(Bron: La Stampa - Vatican Insider)
The idea, however, seems definitely to have waned, though technically there is still time: generally, a month passes between the announcement of a consistory and its celebration. It seems more likely that the creation of new "princes of the Church" will take place in 2012: in February or June. Currently, there are 113 cardinals with right of entry to the conclave (and thus, there are seven vacancies), and there will be 110 by year-end: a consistory in November could therefore provide a dozen new cardinals under eighty. In February 2012, there will be 12 seats available (and there could even be a consistory with as many as fifteen new voting cardinals), while in June the number of posts would increase to 18. Finally, in November 2012, a consistory could be held that would create 25 new cardinals.
One problem will be the high number of Italians. Of the 13 cardinals who will turn eighty in 2012, thereby forfeiting the right to enter the conclave, only one, Renato Raffaele Martino, is Italian. And, compared with only one Italian exiting the college of voters, at least four or five are expected to enter, increasing the Italian patrol in the most exclusive club in the world, the voters who elect the Pope.
There are already two archbishops residing in our country that are waiting for the cardinal's hat: Giuseppe Betori, of Florence, who missed his turn in the preceding consistory, and Cesare Nosiglia of Turin, who was also nominated before the creation of cardinals in November 2011. To these two, should the consistory be held in June, one must add the new patriarch of Venice, the successor of Cardinal Angelo Scola, moved to Milan, whose appointment is expected early next year.
The last consistory rigidly and categorically applied the rule of not including on the list residing archbishops whose predecessor emeritus is under eighty, and therefore voting in the conclave, even if this cardinal had been recalled to the Roman Curia. It will be interesting to see how things will proceed concerning these and other important episcopal sees whose occupants are traditionally elevated to the cardinalate. If the rule were to be re-applied, it would exclude Florence and Turin again, as well as Toledo, Philadelphia, Mechelen-Brussels, Los Angeles, Santiago de Chile, Rio de Janeiro and Quebec. Among the paradoxes of such a strict application of the rule, is the case of Toledo: the current archbishop, Braulio Rodríguez Plaza, at 67 ½ is older than his predecessor, Cardinal Antonio Cañizares Llovera, who turns 66 in two weeks, called to Rome as Prefect of Divine Worship. This means that, in theory Rodríguez Plaza would never have the chance to enter the college of cardinals.
But the overcrowding of Italian candidates for the red hat comes above all from the Roman Curia. In fact, scarlet awaits the Prefect of Propaganda Fide, Fernando Filoni; the president of the Administration of Patrimony of the Apostolic See (APSA), Domenico Calcagno; the new president of the Governorate, Giuseppe Bertello and finally the new president of the Prefecture for Economic Affairs of the Holy See, Giuseppe Versaldi (the latter was appointed to lead the "Vatican Court of Auditors", but did not leave the diocese, where he got permission to stay for a few months, doing double duty as a result of pastoral projects undertaken by him). As one can see, there are already four, to which could be added Archbishop Francesco Coccopalmerio, President of the Pontifical Council for the interpretation of legislative texts (and possible candidate to head the Apostolic Penitentiary); and in view of the Synod on the new evangelization, also the President of the Pontifical Council by the same name wanted by Pope Ratzinger, Archbishop Rino Fisichella.
In the Roman Curia, the only non-Italian to be taken for sure is the Brazilian Joao Braz de Aviz, Prefect of the Congregation for Religious. As one can see, the Italians, and the curial Italians, this time, too, could make up the lion's share, laying claim to a large part of the new posts in the consistory. There is also expectancy to see how Latin America will fare, penalized last consistory.
Some are hoping that certain heads of curial offices will have to wait a turn, as happens nowadays with the large archbishoprics in the world. Benedict XVI, unlike his predecessor, is keen not to exceed the number of 120 cardinal electors established in his days by Paul VI. And although consistories for the creation of cardinals are events totally dependent on the will of the Pope - who is accountable to no one for his choices, preferences and exclusions - a certain balance has always been sought in formulating the list of new cardinals, including persons coming from various continents and from Churches who are suffering for various reasons, as well as pastors who have distinguished themselves by their courageous witness.
At one time the Roman Curia was composed almost entirely of Italians and there is also, according to several scholars of church history, an "Italian vocation" to the Curia. While it was Pius XII and his extraordinary creation of cardinals in 1946 that gave a decisive boost to the internationalization of the College of Cardinals, it was above all with Paul VI that the Roman Curia was opened to the world.
(Bron: La Stampa - Vatican Insider)
zaterdag 13 augustus 2011
Electing a new pope is all fun and games
Italians have an expression, "every death of a pope," to describe rare events. And with Pope Benedict XVI in good health and scheduled to take three foreign trips in the next three months, few are talking about his replacement.
But once a week in the game Vatican Wars, an impassioned struggle begins anew to choose a virtual pontiff who could change or reaffirm some of the Roman Catholic Church's longest established - and most controversial - teachings.
The online papal electors are divided between the socially conservative "Templars" and the liberal "Crusaders." Separating them are five hot-button issues: abortion, artificial birth control, same-sex marriage, women's ordination and married priests.
According to the rules, changing the church's position on any of these practices (which are all forbidden in real life except, in limited cases, married priests) requires the election of 10 liberal popes in a row.
Since the first Facebook election in July, one liberal pope has been chosen, followed by three conservatives, and recently another liberal.
The premise of Vatican Wars, whose name echoes the popular Facebook game Mafia Wars, has drawn fire from those who think it turns religion into a popularity contest.
"The game is based on a fundamental misunderstanding," wrote Catholic Deacon Nick Donnelly in his blog, Protect the Pope. "A pope could not change the church's teaching on same- sex marriage, abortion, contraception, homosexuality, or the ordination of women. To change these doctrines would be to break with the apostolic faith."
The game's designer said the focus on social issues was not intended to shift attitudes one way or the other, but instead to maximize the game's appeal.
"It attracts people to the game who perhaps used to be Catholic and who are not anymore, or who simply disagree with the church's social positions," said Cheyenne Ehrlich, founder of the SGR Games.
Despite some instances during the game's pilot run of players bullying their ideological opponents, Ehrlich insisted that Vatican Wars creates opportunities for mutually respectful dialogue, as well as a deeper knowledge of Catholicism.
All players start as priests and earn "stature points" by performing tasks that include prayer, celebrating Mass and counseling their flocks. Becoming a bishop requires, among other things, speaking out about clerical sex abuse. A small fraction eventually qualifies to become cardinals, from whose ranks popes are drawn.
Virtual immersion in the virtuous life inspires greater devotion among Catholics, who account for about 75 percent of players, Ehrlich said. He cited a survey of regular players of the game's pilot version showing that Catholics were more likely to attend Mass and read the Bible in the real world after playing. The pilot, known as PriestVille, did not feature the contest over the five social issues, however.
The same survey showed that the game made young Catholic men more likely to consider entering the seminary and encouraged those already enrolled to stay there.
The Rev. John Kita, a parish priest in Elkland, Pa., wrote to a Knights of Columbus publication earlier this year praising the earlier game as a "great tool to motivate more men to consider the priesthood." Who knows? Someday the real pope could be someone who first held the job in a virtual capacity.
(Source: RNS)
But once a week in the game Vatican Wars, an impassioned struggle begins anew to choose a virtual pontiff who could change or reaffirm some of the Roman Catholic Church's longest established - and most controversial - teachings.
The online papal electors are divided between the socially conservative "Templars" and the liberal "Crusaders." Separating them are five hot-button issues: abortion, artificial birth control, same-sex marriage, women's ordination and married priests.
According to the rules, changing the church's position on any of these practices (which are all forbidden in real life except, in limited cases, married priests) requires the election of 10 liberal popes in a row.
Since the first Facebook election in July, one liberal pope has been chosen, followed by three conservatives, and recently another liberal.
The premise of Vatican Wars, whose name echoes the popular Facebook game Mafia Wars, has drawn fire from those who think it turns religion into a popularity contest.
"The game is based on a fundamental misunderstanding," wrote Catholic Deacon Nick Donnelly in his blog, Protect the Pope. "A pope could not change the church's teaching on same- sex marriage, abortion, contraception, homosexuality, or the ordination of women. To change these doctrines would be to break with the apostolic faith."
The game's designer said the focus on social issues was not intended to shift attitudes one way or the other, but instead to maximize the game's appeal.
"It attracts people to the game who perhaps used to be Catholic and who are not anymore, or who simply disagree with the church's social positions," said Cheyenne Ehrlich, founder of the SGR Games.
Despite some instances during the game's pilot run of players bullying their ideological opponents, Ehrlich insisted that Vatican Wars creates opportunities for mutually respectful dialogue, as well as a deeper knowledge of Catholicism.
All players start as priests and earn "stature points" by performing tasks that include prayer, celebrating Mass and counseling their flocks. Becoming a bishop requires, among other things, speaking out about clerical sex abuse. A small fraction eventually qualifies to become cardinals, from whose ranks popes are drawn.
Virtual immersion in the virtuous life inspires greater devotion among Catholics, who account for about 75 percent of players, Ehrlich said. He cited a survey of regular players of the game's pilot version showing that Catholics were more likely to attend Mass and read the Bible in the real world after playing. The pilot, known as PriestVille, did not feature the contest over the five social issues, however.
The same survey showed that the game made young Catholic men more likely to consider entering the seminary and encouraged those already enrolled to stay there.
The Rev. John Kita, a parish priest in Elkland, Pa., wrote to a Knights of Columbus publication earlier this year praising the earlier game as a "great tool to motivate more men to consider the priesthood." Who knows? Someday the real pope could be someone who first held the job in a virtual capacity.
(Source: RNS)
donderdag 28 juli 2011
The secret diary of the most recent conclave
This afternoon I took a room at Casa Santa Marta. Setting down my bags, I tried to open the shades, as the room was dark, but it was impossible. One of my brothers had the same problem, and asked for help from the sisters in charge. He thought it was a technical problem. The sisters explained that the blinds had been sealed shut. Seclusion of the Conclave….A new experience for nearly all of us: out of 115 cardinals, only two had previously participated in the election of a pope....
With these words begin the “secret diary” of the conclave that led to the election of Benedict XVI on 19 April 2005 - the confidential, hand-written notes of an anonymous cardinal upon returning to his room after voting in the Sistine Chapel. This remarkable document, published in the journal Limes, allows a step-by-step reconstruction of the balloting process, raising the veil of secrecy that, by the will of the Popes, has always covered the conclave. From the cardinal’s notes obtained by the journal, we learn first of all that Ratzinger’s candidacy was extremely strong from the beginning.
The seventy-eight year old Bavarian cardinal was the only candidate who could count on the dedicated support of a well-organized group, disproving speculation that Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini, contemporary of the new Pope and ex-archbishop of Milan, played a crucial role in the election of Benedict XVI. And consequently, the notes confirm the story published in the Milan daily newspaper Il Giornale the day after the conclave: the only real rival to Ratzinger who could count on a consistent number of votes - up to 40 - was the Archbishop of Buenos Aires, the Argentine Jesuit Jorge Mario Bergoglio.
But let’s go by degrees and reconstruct, step-by-step, the timeline of events that took place in the secrecy of the Sistine Chapel in the twenty-four hours starting the afternoon of Monday, 18 April 2005. At eighteen hundred hours, after the 115 cardinals entered the chapel, had been sworn and heard a meditation by the octogenarian Spidlik, the first round of voting begins. The ballots, rectangular and made to be folded in two, are distributed. On the upper half is written Eligo in Summo Pontificem (“I elect as Supreme Pontiff”); on the lower half, a space to write the chosen name.
Each cardinal approaches the metal ballot box, emits a solemn utterance and deposits his ballot. Everything is finished a few minutes after nineteen hundred hours. The negative result of the vote is a given, but the results are surprising. Ratzinger receives forty-seven votes, Bergoglio – and this is the real surprise of the conclave - receives ten. Nine votes go to Martini, six to Camillio Ruini, Vicar General to the Pope and President of the CEI. Four go to Secretary of State Angelo Sodano, three to the cardinal from Honduras, Oscar Rodriguez Maradiaga, and two to Dionigi Tettamanzi, Martini’s successor in Milan. There are then over thirty votes dispersed among all the cardinals in the conclave, individual votes that do not carry any weight – accordingly, the cardinal-author of the ‘“secret diary” did not note them in his memoir. The smoke is unequivocally black.
After this first vote, the position of the “progressive” wing of the conclave was greatly diminished. They had decided to vote for Martini, a “test candidate,” for the sole purpose of checking to see how many votes he could get. The cardinals left the Sistine Chapel and went to eat. Ratzinger supporters had had a good start, but the Bergoglio surprise hit many electors hard. The archbishop of Buenos Aires is a shy person who avoids TV cameras and does not give interviews. He left the Archbishop’s Palace to live simply and humbly in a small apartment, his character reminiscent in some ways of Pope Luciani. After dinner, they hold small meetings to decide what to do, and above all to convince the undecided. «Small groups, two-three people, there are no big meetings. As in all the hotels, a ban on smoking has been added to the thousand already-existing prohibitions. The Portuguese Cardinal Jose Policarpo da Crux, a famously inveterate smoker, cannot resist and goes outside to light up a good cigar».
The next morning, Tuesday, 19 April, at nine, the 115 cardinals return to Michelangelo’s frescoed Chapel, and under the severe gaze of the figures of the Universal Judgment, pick up their ballots once again. The result of the second vote shows a significant diminution of votes for individual candidates. Ratzinger’s tally climbs to sixty-five (he needs twelve more votes to reach the two-thirds majority needed for election in the first two weeks of conclave) and Bergoglio’s share climbs considerably to thirty-five. Ruini loses all his votes, which go to Ratzinger and not Martini, whose supporters voted for Bergoglio. Only Sodano hangs onto his four votes, and Tettamanzi to his two.
(Source: Andrea Tornielli, La Stampa, Vatican Insider)
With these words begin the “secret diary” of the conclave that led to the election of Benedict XVI on 19 April 2005 - the confidential, hand-written notes of an anonymous cardinal upon returning to his room after voting in the Sistine Chapel. This remarkable document, published in the journal Limes, allows a step-by-step reconstruction of the balloting process, raising the veil of secrecy that, by the will of the Popes, has always covered the conclave. From the cardinal’s notes obtained by the journal, we learn first of all that Ratzinger’s candidacy was extremely strong from the beginning.
The seventy-eight year old Bavarian cardinal was the only candidate who could count on the dedicated support of a well-organized group, disproving speculation that Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini, contemporary of the new Pope and ex-archbishop of Milan, played a crucial role in the election of Benedict XVI. And consequently, the notes confirm the story published in the Milan daily newspaper Il Giornale the day after the conclave: the only real rival to Ratzinger who could count on a consistent number of votes - up to 40 - was the Archbishop of Buenos Aires, the Argentine Jesuit Jorge Mario Bergoglio.
But let’s go by degrees and reconstruct, step-by-step, the timeline of events that took place in the secrecy of the Sistine Chapel in the twenty-four hours starting the afternoon of Monday, 18 April 2005. At eighteen hundred hours, after the 115 cardinals entered the chapel, had been sworn and heard a meditation by the octogenarian Spidlik, the first round of voting begins. The ballots, rectangular and made to be folded in two, are distributed. On the upper half is written Eligo in Summo Pontificem (“I elect as Supreme Pontiff”); on the lower half, a space to write the chosen name.
Each cardinal approaches the metal ballot box, emits a solemn utterance and deposits his ballot. Everything is finished a few minutes after nineteen hundred hours. The negative result of the vote is a given, but the results are surprising. Ratzinger receives forty-seven votes, Bergoglio – and this is the real surprise of the conclave - receives ten. Nine votes go to Martini, six to Camillio Ruini, Vicar General to the Pope and President of the CEI. Four go to Secretary of State Angelo Sodano, three to the cardinal from Honduras, Oscar Rodriguez Maradiaga, and two to Dionigi Tettamanzi, Martini’s successor in Milan. There are then over thirty votes dispersed among all the cardinals in the conclave, individual votes that do not carry any weight – accordingly, the cardinal-author of the ‘“secret diary” did not note them in his memoir. The smoke is unequivocally black.
After this first vote, the position of the “progressive” wing of the conclave was greatly diminished. They had decided to vote for Martini, a “test candidate,” for the sole purpose of checking to see how many votes he could get. The cardinals left the Sistine Chapel and went to eat. Ratzinger supporters had had a good start, but the Bergoglio surprise hit many electors hard. The archbishop of Buenos Aires is a shy person who avoids TV cameras and does not give interviews. He left the Archbishop’s Palace to live simply and humbly in a small apartment, his character reminiscent in some ways of Pope Luciani. After dinner, they hold small meetings to decide what to do, and above all to convince the undecided. «Small groups, two-three people, there are no big meetings. As in all the hotels, a ban on smoking has been added to the thousand already-existing prohibitions. The Portuguese Cardinal Jose Policarpo da Crux, a famously inveterate smoker, cannot resist and goes outside to light up a good cigar».
The next morning, Tuesday, 19 April, at nine, the 115 cardinals return to Michelangelo’s frescoed Chapel, and under the severe gaze of the figures of the Universal Judgment, pick up their ballots once again. The result of the second vote shows a significant diminution of votes for individual candidates. Ratzinger’s tally climbs to sixty-five (he needs twelve more votes to reach the two-thirds majority needed for election in the first two weeks of conclave) and Bergoglio’s share climbs considerably to thirty-five. Ruini loses all his votes, which go to Ratzinger and not Martini, whose supporters voted for Bergoglio. Only Sodano hangs onto his four votes, and Tettamanzi to his two.
(Source: Andrea Tornielli, La Stampa, Vatican Insider)
woensdag 13 juli 2011
The church's cardinals were scholars, pastors, saints, sinners
Michael Walsh. THE CARDINALS: THIRTEEN CENTURIES OF THE MEN BEHIND THE PAPAL THRONE. Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 2011.
The College of Cardinals is the oldest and most exclusive men’s club in the world, and Michael Walsh provides an interesting and entertaining account of some of its remarkable members. Many books have been written on the college, but Walsh focuses on the lives of cardinals who never became popes. This approach allows him to avoid expending precious pages on people whose lives have been extensively described in other books. Instead Walsh introduces us to men who played important but varied roles in the history of the church.
Rather than simply telling their stories in chronological order, Walsh organizes the cardinals by types -- a creative approach that allows him to emphasize themes rather than just recount events from ancient times to the present. But first, Walsh gives the reader a 20-page introduction to the history of the college -- its origins and development as a church institution. Although a treasure for Vatican connoisseurs and specialists, this scholarly chapter with 54 footnotes would have been better placed as an appendix at the back of the book where it would not have scared off average readers simply interested in some good stories.
The introduction gives a quick account of papal elections prior to the institution of the College of Cardinals and then details the development of the college’s role in the election of popes around the beginning of the second millennium. It is a useful and detailed history of the college for those unfamiliar with this development. Those wanting even more detail can peruse the collection of documents available at Salvador Miranda’s Web site at www2.fiu.edu/~mirandas/cardinals.htm.
But what most readers will enjoy in this book are the stories about cardinals that follow the introduction. Walsh groups his cardinals by categories that show how varied they are while still following certain patterns.
The cardinal categories used by Walsh are: “The Precursors” (at the beginning of the second millennium), “The Nearly Men” (who almost became popes), “The Dynasts,” “The Scholar Cardinals,” “The Saints” (very few), “The Pastors,” “Men of War,” “The Politicos,” “Secretaries of State,” “The Exes” (those who resigned), and “Family Men.”
In “The Nearly Men,” we meet those cardinals who were almost popes, including some antipopes. Although talented and well-connected, these men were ultimately the losers in the ecclesiastical game of politics. Included here are Baldassare Cossa (the antipope John XXIII) and the English cardinal Reginald Pole, who failed to get the requisite two-thirds majority because of French opposition.
While Showtime may focus on the Borgia family, in “The Dynasts” Walsh follows the ups and downs of the Colonna family, which had 18 cardinals between 1206 and 1766, although only one of them ever became pope. Their battles with the Orsinis are the stuff of papal history.
“The Scholars,” on the other hand, used their brains rather than family connections to advance in the church. Interestingly, most were not theologians but lawyers. As in civil society, legal training is a good entrée into politics. Nor are there many saints among the cardinals -- in fact the sinners make the more interesting reading. One of the most famous sinners would be Cesare Borgia, whom Walsh treats under “Exes,” since he resigned the cardinalate to marry.
Although the organization of the book by types of cardinals is a help to the reader, Walsh would be the first to acknowledge that some cardinals do not fit easily into one box. Roberto Bellarmino could easily go under either the saints or the scholars. Pietro Gasparri, a secretary of state, was also an accomplished scholar of canon law.
Any book covering a millennium of history is bound to have a few errors that historians will pick at. I noticed, for example, that Walsh has Joseph Bernardin elected general secretary of the U.S. bishops’ conference, when in fact he was appointed by Cardinal John Dearden. But for anyone wanting a sweeping overview of this most colorful and exclusive men’s club, Walsh’s book is the place to start.
(Source: Thomas J. Reese s.j. (National Catholic Reporter)
The College of Cardinals is the oldest and most exclusive men’s club in the world, and Michael Walsh provides an interesting and entertaining account of some of its remarkable members. Many books have been written on the college, but Walsh focuses on the lives of cardinals who never became popes. This approach allows him to avoid expending precious pages on people whose lives have been extensively described in other books. Instead Walsh introduces us to men who played important but varied roles in the history of the church.
Rather than simply telling their stories in chronological order, Walsh organizes the cardinals by types -- a creative approach that allows him to emphasize themes rather than just recount events from ancient times to the present. But first, Walsh gives the reader a 20-page introduction to the history of the college -- its origins and development as a church institution. Although a treasure for Vatican connoisseurs and specialists, this scholarly chapter with 54 footnotes would have been better placed as an appendix at the back of the book where it would not have scared off average readers simply interested in some good stories.
The introduction gives a quick account of papal elections prior to the institution of the College of Cardinals and then details the development of the college’s role in the election of popes around the beginning of the second millennium. It is a useful and detailed history of the college for those unfamiliar with this development. Those wanting even more detail can peruse the collection of documents available at Salvador Miranda’s Web site at www2.fiu.edu/~mirandas/cardinals.htm.
But what most readers will enjoy in this book are the stories about cardinals that follow the introduction. Walsh groups his cardinals by categories that show how varied they are while still following certain patterns.
The cardinal categories used by Walsh are: “The Precursors” (at the beginning of the second millennium), “The Nearly Men” (who almost became popes), “The Dynasts,” “The Scholar Cardinals,” “The Saints” (very few), “The Pastors,” “Men of War,” “The Politicos,” “Secretaries of State,” “The Exes” (those who resigned), and “Family Men.”
In “The Nearly Men,” we meet those cardinals who were almost popes, including some antipopes. Although talented and well-connected, these men were ultimately the losers in the ecclesiastical game of politics. Included here are Baldassare Cossa (the antipope John XXIII) and the English cardinal Reginald Pole, who failed to get the requisite two-thirds majority because of French opposition.
While Showtime may focus on the Borgia family, in “The Dynasts” Walsh follows the ups and downs of the Colonna family, which had 18 cardinals between 1206 and 1766, although only one of them ever became pope. Their battles with the Orsinis are the stuff of papal history.
“The Scholars,” on the other hand, used their brains rather than family connections to advance in the church. Interestingly, most were not theologians but lawyers. As in civil society, legal training is a good entrée into politics. Nor are there many saints among the cardinals -- in fact the sinners make the more interesting reading. One of the most famous sinners would be Cesare Borgia, whom Walsh treats under “Exes,” since he resigned the cardinalate to marry.
Although the organization of the book by types of cardinals is a help to the reader, Walsh would be the first to acknowledge that some cardinals do not fit easily into one box. Roberto Bellarmino could easily go under either the saints or the scholars. Pietro Gasparri, a secretary of state, was also an accomplished scholar of canon law.
Any book covering a millennium of history is bound to have a few errors that historians will pick at. I noticed, for example, that Walsh has Joseph Bernardin elected general secretary of the U.S. bishops’ conference, when in fact he was appointed by Cardinal John Dearden. But for anyone wanting a sweeping overview of this most colorful and exclusive men’s club, Walsh’s book is the place to start.
(Source: Thomas J. Reese s.j. (National Catholic Reporter)
maandag 4 juli 2011
Angelo Scola, le successeur dont rêve le pape
Dans l'ordre normal des choses, les vaticanistes fourbissent leurs listes de papabili lorsque le pape a éternué à la messe ou qu'il a glissé dans sa baignoire... Par une superbe ironie, c'est un Benoît XVI en pleine forme qui a appuyé sur la gachette des spéculations à propos du prochain conclave. Son coup ? Une nomination très symbolique. Depuis deux ans que le cardinal Dionigi Tettamanzi avait dépassé la limite d'âge sur le siège de de Milan, on se demandait qui serait choisi pour lui succéder.
Milan est d'autant plus emblématique que deux de ses archevêques sont devenus papes au XXe siècle: Paul VI et Pie XI. Le suspense a pris fin le 28 juin, lorsque Benoît XVI a nommé le cardinal Angelo Scola. En tant que patriarche de Venise, il était déjà sur un trône qui a porté trois papes contemporains (Pie X, Jean XXIII, Jean-Paul Ier). Si Benoit XVI a voulu le transférer à Milan, c'est pour enfoncer le clou de sa "papabilité".
Loi de continuité depuis Jean XXIII
Angelo Scola, qui aura 70 ans en novembre, était déjà un sérieux papabile en 2005. Il l'est plus que jamais : la loi de continuité que l'on observe depuis Jean XXIII, selon laquelle un pape est choisi en raison de sa proximité avec son prédécesseur, jouerait à plein. Celle du prélat italien avec le pontife bavarois est évidente. Très jeune, Scola a fait partie du vivier intellectuel de la revue Communio, étant lié avec les théologiens Henri de Lubac et Hans Urs von Balthasar. Exactement comme Ratzinger. Celui-ci apprécie aussi les hommes qui, comme lui, ont souffert pour leurs idées. Parce qu'il était membre du mouvement italien Communion et Libération, Scola, originaire de la capitale lombarde, a été renvoyé du séminaire milanais par l'archevêque de l'époque, qui se défiait des apôtres de Don Giussani. En le réinstallant au bercail, Benoît XVI offre à son ami une sainte revanche.
Issu, comme Ratzinger, d'un milieu très simple, Scola a mené une brillante carrière théologique qui l'a mené de l'université de Fribourg à celle du Latran, dont il devient recteur en 1995 après une expérience d'évêque de terrain, en Toscane.
Un Italien pour réformer la curie ?
L'homme peut aussi bien être classé à "droite" sur les questions de famille et de bioéthique, qu'à "gauche" en raison de sa passion pour la doctrine sociale de l’Église et la défense des pauvres. Visionnaire, il a créé une revue de réflexion islamo-chrétienne, Oasis. Scola prône une loyale et sportive compétition spirituelle entre christianisme et islam, à mille lieues de la logique de l'affrontement communautariste ou de l'islamophobie de certains lobbies catholiques, et plaide pour une société métissée.
Sur la liste des papabili, Angelo Scola n'est pourtant pas le seul "ratzingerien d'ouverture" susceptible de monter sur le trône de Pierre. Il faut ici mentionner Mauro Piacenza, 66 ans, l'actuel préfet de la congrégation pour le clergé. Et surtout le Canadien Marc Ouellet, 67 ans, l'ex-archevêque de Québec devenu préfet de la congrégation pour les évêques.
L'urgence d'une modernisation des méthodes de travail du Vatican ferait pencher pour une solution italienne en cas de conclave. Seul un Italien serait en effet en mesure de réformer la curie, paralysée par les arcanes de la culture méditerranéenne. Une montagne que deux valeureux ouvriers, polonais et allemand, ont renoncé à déplacer.
Milan est d'autant plus emblématique que deux de ses archevêques sont devenus papes au XXe siècle: Paul VI et Pie XI. Le suspense a pris fin le 28 juin, lorsque Benoît XVI a nommé le cardinal Angelo Scola. En tant que patriarche de Venise, il était déjà sur un trône qui a porté trois papes contemporains (Pie X, Jean XXIII, Jean-Paul Ier). Si Benoit XVI a voulu le transférer à Milan, c'est pour enfoncer le clou de sa "papabilité".
Loi de continuité depuis Jean XXIII
Angelo Scola, qui aura 70 ans en novembre, était déjà un sérieux papabile en 2005. Il l'est plus que jamais : la loi de continuité que l'on observe depuis Jean XXIII, selon laquelle un pape est choisi en raison de sa proximité avec son prédécesseur, jouerait à plein. Celle du prélat italien avec le pontife bavarois est évidente. Très jeune, Scola a fait partie du vivier intellectuel de la revue Communio, étant lié avec les théologiens Henri de Lubac et Hans Urs von Balthasar. Exactement comme Ratzinger. Celui-ci apprécie aussi les hommes qui, comme lui, ont souffert pour leurs idées. Parce qu'il était membre du mouvement italien Communion et Libération, Scola, originaire de la capitale lombarde, a été renvoyé du séminaire milanais par l'archevêque de l'époque, qui se défiait des apôtres de Don Giussani. En le réinstallant au bercail, Benoît XVI offre à son ami une sainte revanche.
Issu, comme Ratzinger, d'un milieu très simple, Scola a mené une brillante carrière théologique qui l'a mené de l'université de Fribourg à celle du Latran, dont il devient recteur en 1995 après une expérience d'évêque de terrain, en Toscane.
Un Italien pour réformer la curie ?
L'homme peut aussi bien être classé à "droite" sur les questions de famille et de bioéthique, qu'à "gauche" en raison de sa passion pour la doctrine sociale de l’Église et la défense des pauvres. Visionnaire, il a créé une revue de réflexion islamo-chrétienne, Oasis. Scola prône une loyale et sportive compétition spirituelle entre christianisme et islam, à mille lieues de la logique de l'affrontement communautariste ou de l'islamophobie de certains lobbies catholiques, et plaide pour une société métissée.
Sur la liste des papabili, Angelo Scola n'est pourtant pas le seul "ratzingerien d'ouverture" susceptible de monter sur le trône de Pierre. Il faut ici mentionner Mauro Piacenza, 66 ans, l'actuel préfet de la congrégation pour le clergé. Et surtout le Canadien Marc Ouellet, 67 ans, l'ex-archevêque de Québec devenu préfet de la congrégation pour les évêques.
L'urgence d'une modernisation des méthodes de travail du Vatican ferait pencher pour une solution italienne en cas de conclave. Seul un Italien serait en effet en mesure de réformer la curie, paralysée par les arcanes de la culture méditerranéenne. Une montagne que deux valeureux ouvriers, polonais et allemand, ont renoncé à déplacer.
Abonneren op:
Posts (Atom)