The Ecumenism Blog

Home » Posts tagged 'bishop emeritus of Rome'

Tag Archives: bishop emeritus of Rome

Very brief thought on popes emeritii

[Found in the archives of half-written posts, from shortly after the election of Pope Francis, the third anniversary of which we have just celebrated]

When your pastor retires, he is not called Father Emeritus John Smith.
Rather, Father John, Pastor emeritus of St. Whatshisname Parish.

When your bishop retires, he is not called Bishop Emeritus Sean Patrick Murphy.
Rather, His Excellency, Bishop Sean, Bishop emeritus of Brigadoon.
Or, His Eminence, Cardinal Sean, Bishop emeritus of Brigadoon
(if also has a Roman suburbicarian see, titulus, or diaconiae).

When the pope retires, he ought not be called Pope Emeritus Benedict.
Rather, His Holiness, Pope Benedict, Bishop emeritus of Rome.

This seemed to be clear, we may recall, when suddenly it was not.
But then it was, at least to the new pope.

From such a good ecclesiologist as Ratzinger, the style Pope Emeritus always struck a discordant note. He knows better than most that there is no office of pope, and therefore no emeritus pope, only the office of bishop of Rome to which the style of “pope” adheres. (Like the priest who is styled “father”).

Roman Pontiff emeritus, also offered in the official statement, never really took off, either (can’t imagine why…).

Turns out, it apparently was not his idea, and he would have been happy with “Father Benedict” (or Pope Benedict, since “pope” just means “father” anyway), as a style. This also recalls and reminds us of the practice that all clergy – bishop, deacon, presbyter – can be addressed as “Father”, not only the presbyterate.

That would have made a lot more sense: Father Benedict, Bishop emeritus of Rome.

The cross of Pope Benedict XVI

 

The first African pope? 1800 years ago…

I was about to start my own blog on the three african popes, because of all the attention being given to Cardinals Turkson, of Ghana, and Arinze, of Nigeria. 

But then, i found this blog, and decided it was even better, because it came with a cool map showing the known or presumed birthplace for all known bishops of Rome outside of Europe. He even includes St. Peter. 

I am still going to work on a quick post about the geographic distribution of the college of cardinals, and how it might better represent global Catholicism.

Map of Non-European Popes
Pope Benedict XVI’s decision to resign has taken both the Catholic and non-Catholic worlds by immense shock. Some have begun to play the game of “who will be the next Pope?” This game usually ends in a surprise no one saw coming but this does not stop people from trying over and over again. Some have speculated , as they did in 2005 right after the death of Pope John Paul II’s death, that there will be an African or Latin American Pope. Some even go as far to say there could be the “first black Pope in 1,500 years.”

I decided to study and map out popes born outside of Europe. There were some surprises among the results.

 



Of the 265 officially recognized Popes, 217 have been Italian while 17 were French and 13 were Greek (though this includes ethnic and cultural Greeks who were from Greek Italy and Greek Asia). So to solve problems like this I declared a non-European pope to be one who was born outside the modern understanding of what is Europe, regardless of ethnicity or culture.

Three Popes were born in Roman Africa, which today is part of Algeria, Tunisia, and Libya. These African popes were Pope Victor I (189-199), Pope Miltiades (311 to 314), and Pope Gelasius I (492 to 496). These Popes are sometimes described as Black in today’s press because of their African origin. However, the elite in these provinces were descendants of Italian Romans while the population in rural areas were Berbers, who are an olive hue. There is no comparably or historic evidence that the African popes were Black.

Two popes, both ethnically Greek, were born in modern day Turkey. Pope John V (685-686) was from Antioch and Pope John VI was from Ephesus (701-705). John V is sometimes considered “Syrian” due to Antioch’s location in Byzantine Syria.

Four popes were born in “Syria”, modern-day Syria and maybe Lebanon. These are Popes Anicetus (150 to 167), Sisinnius (708), Constantine (708-715), and Gregory III (731-741). Anicetus was born in modern day Homs, site of heavy fighting in the on-going civil war, while the other three were born in newly Muslim conquered Syria. This shows that Christian intellectual thought and leadership were not crushed right away by the new Muslim rulers.

Two popes were born in modern day Israel, depending on who one asks. Saint Peter, the first Pope, was born in the village of Bethsaida along the Sea of Galilee while Pope Theodore I (642-649) was an ethnic Greek from Jerusalem. However, Bethsaida is east of the Jordan River in the Golan Heights region. This is Israel or Syria on depending one’s perspective. Meanwhile, the historic part of Jerusalem where Pope Theodore I was from is mostly likely in the part of the city east of the 1949 cease fire line and therefore either Israel or the West Bank.

So of the eleven popes born outside Europe, at least two were of ethnically non-European origin: Peter (Jewish) and Constantine (Assyrian). Up to three more, the Africans, may have been Berber. So between 0.75% to 1.88% of all Popes were of non-European ethnicity.

Some of these Popes played major roles while pontiff. Pope Theodore I worked hard and proved Roman supremacy over the Emperor and Patriarch in Constantinople. Meanwhile Pope Victor I was the pope who changed the language of the Roman Church from Greek to Latin. Without his change traditionalist Catholics would be lamenting the loss of Greek in today’s liturgies.

Soon the Vatican will announce there is a new Pope. No one yet knows who that person will be and where they will be from. However, now you have a better understanding of the history of non-European popes.

Original post from Geographic Travels.

Why Pope Gregory XII Doesn’t Really Count

Franciscan blogger Daniel P. Horan adds some reflections on the level of ‘freedom’ involved in the previous papal resignations.

Benedict Resigns – Retired Pope Q & A

[Updates since the writing of this Q & A, usually confirmation of my speculations, are included below in blue.]

The Italians have squelched the discussion of papal resignation in the past by brushing the idea aside with comments like “you cannot have a pope emeritus,” or, “what would you even do with a retired pope?”

Several question, some serious and some mere curiosities  have arisen in recent discussions, both virtually and in person here in Rome: Does the pope abdicate, resign, or retire? How does this compare to Pope John Paul II? When will the conclave be? Which cardinals can participate? What will Benedict’s new title be? What is the protocol and prerogatives for a retired pope? What role does he have in the Vatican, the college of Cardinals, or the Church? Does he retain his infallibility? Does he still wear white?

Official plans of the conclave will be publicized shortly, perhaps even today. It should not be difficult, even in the slow-moving Vatican, when many of the cardinals are already gathered for consistory. Though, at the same time, they may need a couple days to deal with the shock of the announcement. It seems only the dean of the college and a very small handful of others had notice even a day or two in advance of Monday’s announcement.

The following includes official answers where available, and speculation or suggestions where indicated.

Abdication, Resignation, or Retirement?

CIC 332§2   Si contingat ut Romanus Pontifex muneri suo renuntiet, ad validitatem requiritur ut renuntiatio libere fiat et rite manifestetur, non vero ut a quopiam acceptetur.

CIC 332§2   If it happens that the Roman Pontiff resigns his office, it is required for validity that the resignation is made freely and properly manifested but not that it is accepted by anyone.

Though “abdication” is the term used when a monarch leaves, the term has not been used officially since the loss of the papal state, for the resignation of the popes. Though technically still an absolute monarch, as sovereign of the Vatican City-State, the pope is the bishop of Rome above all else, and therefore he “resigns.” Though, in this case, “retires” certainly seems a valid description.

[On 18 February, Bishop Thomas Paprocki, bishop of Springfield and serves on the USCCB Committee on Canonical Affairs and Church Governance, with both a JD and an STD, confirmed the correct translation is ‘resignation’ rather than ‘abdication.’]

How does this compare to Pope John Paul II?

We really should not compare the two. John Paul II showed us suffering and ageing in dignity, Benedict XVI teaches us genuine kenosis and leadership with integrity and humility. It is hard to continue a ministry that it seems the Holy Spirit has called you to when your body fails you, it is harder to let go of power so absolute.

Voices that have criticized the Holy Father for resigning, saying things like “a father does not abandon his family,” or, “Wojtyla stayed until the end because one does not come down from the cross” seem to have missed the point.

Being pope is not about suffering, but about serving. A bishop emeritus can give witness to dignified suffering and the value of the elderly, but an impeded pope cannot serve. Benedict has reminded us to separate the office from the person, putting the emphasis on the Petrine ministry, where it belongs.

When will the conclave be held?

The apostolic constitution Universi Dominici Gregis, published by Bl. John Paul II and adapted slightly by Pope Benedict XVI, governs the Conclave, the process for the election of a new pope. According to the constitution, §37,

…from the moment when the Apostolic See is lawfully vacant, the Cardinal electors who are present must wait fifteen full days for those who are absent; the College of Cardinals is also granted the faculty to defer, for serious reasons, the beginning of the election for a few days more. But when a maximum of twenty days have elapsed from the beginning of the vacancy of the See, all the Cardinal electors present are obliged to proceed to the election.

This would seem to put the earliest starting date for the conclave on 15 March, and the latest starting date on 20 March. [This was confirmed by the Vatican Press office on 13 February].

However, since the purpose of this is to allow the cardinals not in Rome to get here, and because they have been given 17 days notice from the announcement to the time the retirement takes effect, perhaps it will be decided that this interregnum could be dispensed with. [A motu proprio to this effect is being considered, as of 22 February.]

Certainly, all hope that there will be a new bishop of Rome by Holy Week, which starts 24 March.

Which cardinals will participate?

The right to elect the Roman Pontiff belongs exclusively to the Cardinals of Holy Roman Church, with the exception of those who have reached their eightieth birthday before the day of the Roman Pontiff’s death or the day when the Apostolic See becomes vacant. (UDG §33)

One cardinal turns 80 on 26 February, and that is Lubomyr Husar, the retired Major Archbishop (de facto patriarch) of the Ukranian Catholic Church. According to the text, he would be excluded from the election, for being too old by less than 48 hours. Two others turn 80 in early March, Walter Kasper (March 5) and Severino Poletto (March 18), but even if the Conclave begins after their birthdays, they would still be admitted.

What is the protocol and prerogatives for a retired pope?

There is nothing in canon law or the apostolic constitution relating this. There are some ancient canons, and the precedent of retired bishops, that will be helpful. We know just a few things at this point, and the rest is speculation. We do know that Benedict XVI will not be involved in the election of his successor, and that he will retire first to Castel Gandolfo, and then to the monastery of cloistered nuns inside the Vatican for a time.

What will Benedict’s new title be?

The pope is the bishop of Rome. That is his title, his office, and the font of all other titles and offices, from Vicar of Christ to Servant of the Servants of God. Therefore the obvious choice would seem to be “bishop emeritus of Rome” just as any other retired bishop. But that is simply this ecclesiologist’s suggestion.

[On 22 February, Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio, president of the pontifical council for legislative texts, confirmed that after his retirement, he will be known as “His Holiness, Benedict XVI, bishop emeritus of Rome”.]

What role will he have in the Vatican, the college of Cardinals, or the Church?

Effectively none. In terms of protocol and precedence, one can imagine that he will be “ranked” below only the serving pope. Traditionally, popes have been forbidden from participating in the selection of their successors, and we already know he will be excluded from the coming conclave.

When a powerful leader resigns, it always seems the best practice that he or she basically disappear from the public eye for about a year, at least, to allow his or her successor to settle into the role. When the last Jesuit general retired – another office that was until recently ‘for life’ – he became a librarian in the Holy Land, and kept out of even provincial politics.  When Fr. Ted Hesburgh retired as president of Notre Dame after 35 years, he took a year-long road trip and tour, staying away from campus. Mary McAleese, after 14 years as president of Ireland came to Rome and moved into the Lay Centre at Foyer Unitas to return to her studies of canon law.

Does he retain his infallibility?

The pope is not infallible. Not personally, anyway: Infallibility is not a possession or power of the pope, but a divine gift attributed to the Church as a whole, and derivatively to the college of bishops as a whole. The bishop of Rome, in communion with and head of the college of bishops, may exercise that authority in some very limited, very precise conditions, but it goes with the office, not the individual.

Will he still wear white?

I have no idea; I would expect not, but it will be curious to see what is deemed appropriate. Perhaps a black cassock or simar with white trim?

Image

[John Allen, Jr., adds his own Q & A after today’s lengthy press briefing here.]

%d bloggers like this: