Month: February 2013

The news media today published the story of Cardinal O’Brien of Scotland’s resignation as Archibishop. Moreover the Cardinal will not attend the Conclave (click here). The decision is a double-jolt to the Conclave. First, because the on-going scandal clearly toppled Cardinal O’Brien; secondly, because O’Brien will no longer vote in the Conclave; indeed, it appears Benedict will appoint a new Cardinal in the next two days who will be qualified to vote (!!).

Cardinal O’Brien and Cardinal Julius Darmaatmadja (Indonesia) both confirmed they will not participate in the Conclave. Cardinal Darmaatmadja cited his poor visison. 

The media sees all of this as “damage control.” Perhaps, but it also may well be “game on.” Actions speak louder than words in a Conclave, and many messages will be sent an studies over the days leading up to the Conclave. Of more interest is which group in the Vatican loses with Cardinal O’Brien’s departure…

Recent news items are clarifying the coming battle known as the Papal Conclave. In an event perhaps as rare as the Pope’s resignation, that Conclave battleground guards two prizes: one for the Soul of the Catholic Church, the other for its Power. The battle will therefore be extraordinarily complex with enormous consequences for what until now is one of the most important institutions in the world.  

The battle for the soul of the Church is part of an ongoing struggle moving Roman Catholicism from its terrible embrace of feudalism and its institutions to something new. The Church’s mission remains the same – bringing the good news of salvation to the world, but the instrument for doing this work, its culture and institutions, are under enormous pressure to change. Indeed many suggest if this Conclave does not deliver changes from a medieval European cultural norm to something that works in the 21st century this Conclave may mark the rapid decline and fall of the Church in modern times. Click here for an excerpt from an article published in Austra’s Die Furche on the subject. 

The battle for the Power of the Church, while not well understood outside of Church and State circles, is being played out on a far-more-public venue than anytime in the last millenium. In the age of Twitter there are growing exposures of a Curia characterized by cronyism, financial malfeasance, and sexual excess. 

One of the major focal points of this Conclave is the lack of wide spread acceptance of Benedict’s stated reason for resigning: his failing health. Dario Fo perhaps put it best when he noted:

It was the attrition in the Curia, Vatileaks and all the sharks who surrounded the Pope, spied on and betrayed him. Age certainly isn’t the only thing that burdens him.

So perhaps Machiavelli better understands the Pope’s resignation than Truthers searching yet again for another smoking gun. Like all institutions, at the center of any power struggle are groups with vested interests. In the Vatican, these reside in the Curia. 

The Roman Curia is the administrative body of the Holy See and the central governing body of the Church. Click here to see the current structure from the Vatican website. In general terms, the Curia is divided into various departments or congretations.

The power struggle suggested by Vatileak documents hints at several groups and implies croynism, financial impropriety, and corruption. They are intertwined and have conflicating and complementary interests. One group is referred to as “a network of gay prelates,” another group as “subject to external influences” (this probably refers to the Vatican Bank known as the Institute for Religious Works), and there are other groups and interests. 

Recent moves by Benedict (the appointment of a new director of the Vatican Bank and the transfer of an Under Secretary of State Msgr. Ettore Balestrero to Colombia) offer evidence of the intensity of the struggle. 

This raises the specter of a complex Conclave: one that faces the challenge of controlling the Curia’s power grabbing while also facing complex doctrinal and structural issues. Click here for more on this from Corriere del Ticino. Perhaps no recent conclave better fits Churchill’s dictum: “a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma.”

An article penned for the Irish Examiner notes: 

But surely the odds are that the majority of people for whom the resignation of the pope is a matter of supreme indifference are themselves members of his flock, at least nominally. And yet their eyes glaze over if you talk about it. 

“A matter of supreme indifference” – these words capture the response of many, many “Catholic” young whena asked about their interest in the Conclave. 

What happened? In the span of just two generations the Church went from a position of being a critical factor in the lives of a large percentage of its members to this toxic indifference. This blog looks to foster dialogue between those who remember a valuable asset in their lives and those whose attitude is that of supreme indifference. 

Bill Keller’s article (click here or see the links section of the blog) offers some guidance on this question. He notes that Catholicism “is a service industry” and here the young indeed are left baffled. What services does the Church provide them today? Many young express outrage at the hypocracy of an institution they perceive as telling them how to “be good” when the institution itself is challenged by rot from within. 

The child abuse scandal is not the only element in this dilemna, perhaps not even the most important. There is a sense of a “supreme disconnect” between the lives of our youth and Church leaders. The half-hearted attempts by these leaders to “engage” the young all too often end in “preaching without understanding”, further alienation, and eventual supreme indifference. 

Still the Church, and its to-be-selected new chief executive, need to discover how to serve today’s young. History might offer some guideposts. At the dawn of the 20th century, the Church’s institutions in the US – parochial schools, youth organizations, orphanages, hospitals, etc., provided desparately needed services for an immigrant populations. The Church had its finger on the pulse of its people’s needs at that time and the institution became a source of strength and comfort for its members. 

While our young may sit the Conclave out with indifference, those of us whose lives were enriched by those experiences in past years can pray that the Cardinals ask themselves these hard questions: how can the Church serve the young of today? And pray that said service follow Catholic tradition of “preaching” through actions of charity rather than empty words and criticisms.

On the morning of February 11, 2013, the Vatican announced the pending resignationof Pope Benedict XVI. Benedict will be the first Pope to relinquish the office since Gregory XII did so in 1415 to end the Western Schism and the first do so on his own initiative since Pope Celestine V in 1294.

This is a short introduction to Papal Conclaves and how they work. 

The Pope, the Bishop of Rome, is chosen by the College of Cardinals, convened and sequestered in St. Peter’s for the election. Since 1846 the voting itself occurs in the Sistine Chapel. According to current Canon Law, cardinal electors are those cardinals under the age of 80. 

Conclave comes from two Latin words: cum and clavis, best translated as locked with a key. It refers to both the locked place where the election takes place (the Sistine Chapel) and the gathering itself. 

The process dates back to 1059 C.E. and replaced the earlier system of selecting a bishop via the consensus of the clergy and laity of the diocese. Currently the rules require a two-thirds super majority of the College as well as the consent of the elected. 

The Dean of the College of Cardinals (currently Cardinal Angelo Sardano) convenes the Conclave, which begins fifteen to twenty days after the death of a Pope. Since the papacy will become vacant on February 28th, most interpret Canon Law to mean the Conclave begin fifteen to twenty days later. Recent press releases suggest that indeed the Conclave may begin before March 15th. The actual date may depend on the speed which the members of the College of Cardinals arrive in Rome. 

Procedures followed during the Conclave are specified in the Ordo Rituum Conclavis (Order of Rites for the Conclave). It is possible that these rites are changed by Benedict through a Moto Propio (literally “on his own impulse,” meaning a document issued by the Pope on is own initiative and personally signed by him) before February 28th. 

The Conclave will begin with Mass, followed by the preliminary sessions, presided over by the Dean of Cadinals, to clarify the election procedures. Then all not belonging to the College of Cardinals are dismissed and the Cardinals are sealed in the Sistine Chapel.

For each ballot the Cardinals receive rectangular cards with the words Eligio in summum pontificem (I elect as supreme pontiff) printed at the top. Each cardinal prints the name of his choice on the card, folds it down the middle, and then places the card in a chalice. 

After each vote the ballots are burned. Chemicals are added to make the smoke black (meaning no pope is yet selected) or white (meaning there is a pope). The only requirement is that the Pope be a baptized male.

Once selected, if not already a bishop, the new Pope is immediately ordained (the last non-bishop to be selected Pope was Urban VI elected in 1378). The Cardinals present then pledge their support to the new pope. The Dean of Cardinals ask what name the new pope chooses. The oldest Cardinal present announces the choice to the City of Rome and the world with the following Latin phrase: Annuntio vobis gaudium magnum! Habemos Papam! (I announce to you a great joy! We have a pope!).