Popes and the Papacy

An Ongoing Errata On Books About Popes

by Anura Guruge

I do this with utmost trepidation.

I really do not want to be a gadfly or be seen as a critic. I fully understand the meaning of that sage saying "those who live in glass houses ..."

That is why I started off writing a long apologia BEFORE I even started this project. My only motive and rationale is to propagate accuracy. You all can help. As I repeatedly point out, I may be wrong. I know I get things wrong, and I do not have a problem acknowledging my errors and fixing them.

Anyway, here is an ongoing list of POTENTIAL errors I have found in books about the popes. It is not a complete list. I just don't have the time. Again, I am sorry I have to do this. Don't shoot me for being essentially a messenger.

All the best. Many thanks.
Anura

Grace, and may peace be with you.

The Role of Cardinals in Papal Elections

by Anura Guruge

The singular preferential role that cardinals now enjoy when it comes to electing a new pope, i.e., that of being the exclusive, absolute electors (albeit only those under the age of 80) as well as the only ones eligible to be elected popes, is a relatively new occurrence -- having only come to be as of 1378. Even then, the notion that the next pope will be selected from within the College of Cardinals is but a tradition -- fostered by the cardinals.

While Canon Law (1983) as well as the latest Apostolic Constitution on papal elections [viz., John Paul II's 1996 Universi Dominci Gregis] categorically state that a new pope may only be elected by the cardinals (subject to the 80 year limit) there have been no edicts since Nicholas II's 1059 In Nomine Domini (In the Name of the Lord) that have in anyway touched upon the eligibility criteria to be pope.

Per In Nomine Domini a new pope would normally be chosen from within the ranks of Roman clergy (which included the then cardinals) but if a suitable candidate could not be found from those ranks, the cardinal bishops could chose somebody from another church. That is basically the 'last words' on papal eligibility. The last time a non-cardinal was elected, i.e., Urban VI, matters got so bad that the highly disruptive Great Western Schism [1378 to 1409] came to be -- with three competing popes vying for legitimacy towards the end! Coincidently, since then, the cardinals have assidously stuck with their own when it come to new popes.

The roles that cardinals have played as electors have also undergone some significant changes since 769 -- the first instance that cardinal priests and cardinal deacons were mentioned, separately from the Roman clergy, as the only ones eligble to be selected as pope.

Over the last six weeks I have been documenting a detailed history of the role of cardinls in papal elections. As is invariably the case, I have found some interesting gaps in prior studies of this subject. For example, many overlook the John IX's 898 synod that for the first time gave Cardinal Bishops a role in papal elections -- Cardinal Bishops, by definition, being from outside of Rome; Rome only having but one bishop, the pope.

I put together this chart, initially just to help me keep my bearings and successfully navigate through the various synods and edits without losing track of who was allowed to do what to whom. But, I realized that some of you will also find it useful. So here is a chart of the roles played by cardinals in papal elections as of 769.

[PLEASE click on the image to get a full size version in a pop-up window.]

 

Well I hope you enjoy it. I have about 40 dense pages documenting just this table! I will share it with you one day. Promise. But this is all for now.

I also should mention that a couple of weeks ago we went past the 10,000 visitor mark for this BLOG. Since I only started it in July 2008 that was ~1,000 visitors a month. Though I have not been updating this BLOG as often as I had hoped the hit rate continues ti grow. So thank you.

All the best.

Anura

Grace, and may peace be with you.

Popes From the Religious Orders

by Anura Guruge

[TAKE 1]

<< This is very much a work in progress, hence the 'Take 1' designation. Getting reliable data to compile this list proved to be way more difficult than I had hoped. So this is also an attempt to try and draw a line in the sand from which I and others can move forward and onwards. >>

This list, in this form, may not be fully inclusive. But this is as far as I have managed to get so far. (Please click on the image below to enlarge it.)

You will notice that I have six (6) popes, near the top, that are not assigned to an order. Traditionally all six of these popes are designated as being Benedictines -- giving them a grand total of 18 popes. Alak, I just cannot find enough credible documentation to be able to unequivocally state that they were indeed Benedictines. In such situations, I always, err on the side of caution. So until I can find categorical confirmation I will leave these gaps 'blank,' rather than make an invalid association.

Some of you may be surprised that Julius II is not listed here as a Franciscan. That is because he wasn't! Yes, he joined the order when young to study with them. But he left the order while still a novice.

I am still working through this list as time permits. (In addition to writing another book on popes, I have other distractions like building multi-media Web sites for prominent local lawyers!)

So this is what I have. Thirty popes (so far) that I know were monks, 24 definitely belonged to orders; 12 Benedictines, 4 Franciscans, 4 Dominicans, 2 Cistercians and 2 Augustinians.

I hope this helps. I hope to be refining and updating this over the next couple of weeks.

Thanks.

Anura

Thoughts on the Next Papal Name Based on the Papabili

Last September, soon after my "Pope Names" book came out, I was asked to comment on possible names for the next pope -- and I did so. That list is still good. But since then, as some of you know, I went ahead and stuck my neck out and came up with MY papabili list for 2009.  Given that a pope elect chooses an assumed name, per his unique prerogative, based on his personal circumstances, I realize that I must now refine my list based on the currently identified papabili.

This is meant to be, and in reality has to be, an 'organic' post. For one, the papabili list, hence why I dated it, will change over time. I believe (and I could be wrong) that we are due for another consistory. If we get one I will have to go back and reexamine my list in light of the new cardinals (since I do believe that the next pope will be elected from among the cardinal electors -- who are under the age of 75). Since trying to guess what name a given papabile might pick is based purely on conjecture, I realize that I will have to refine my thoughts as I encounter more 'data points' -- which I tend to do on daily basis. So those are the caveats. That all said, here we go ...

BENEDICT XVII is a long shot
Benedict XVII is always a possibility. Over the duration of the 266 popes, we have had 13 instances of consecutive name use, John Paul I & II and Pius XI & XII being the last two instances.

Cardinal Scherer, in particular, has multiple reasons for picking that name -- if he so wishes. Benedict XVI, in addition to creating him a cardinal, has favored him with some lavish appointments. Their relationship, indubitably close, goes back to the mid-1990s. Plus, Cardinal Scherer has Germanic roots. Cardinal Marc Ouellet has also had a close relationship with the current pope -- again going back to the 1990s.

That said I do not believe (and I could be wrong), based on the current 'climate,' that the next pope, whoever he may be, is going to reuse the name 'Benedict.' But that could change over time. At present, I am going to let current world news speak to this point. I do not need to get into the details. Lets just say that in the context of modern papacies, this current one has experienced more turbulence than most.

Unlikely to be two German popes in a row
I have heard that some Germans are upset that my papabili list does not contain any German papabili! I never thought I would have to explain this omission. WOW. It has nothing, whatsoever, to do with politics, patriotism, ideology or any other beliefs. It has all to do with 'spreading the wealth' so to speak -- to use a term that got overused towards the end of the last US Presidential election. The current set of cardinal electors represent 52 countries. Many, in particular the Latin American countries, have never had a pope. So ... Come on. Be realistic. The chances of another German pope is unlikely. It could happen. But it is unlikely. I also don't think the next pope will be from Poland or for that matter the USA. OK?

JOHN XXIV is a great fit
Cardinal Odilo Pedro Scherer, from Portuguese-speaking Brazil, could make a lot of people very happy and gain a ton of friends if he decides to assume the name 'John' -- if elected. John XXI [1276-1277], a physician and noted scholar (who among other things wrote a book about how to treat eye diseases), was Portuguese and was known as 'Pedro Hispano.'  [Yes, he had an unfortunate death when an addition he had had hastily built to the Papal Palace in Viterbo (Italy), in the main to hold his books, crashed down upon him.]

'John,' moreover, would hark back to the beloved, Blessed John XXIII. And therein lies the rub!

A 'John XXIV' would indeed signify a bold, new outlook -- per that of the pope that convened Vatican II. But, Cardinal Scherer is probably the most 'conservative' of the papabili. So he might not feel comfortable with that name.

Leo XIV is another option
If so, he could opt for Leo XIV. Leo XIII [1878-1903], another intellectual, was also immensely popular. He convened the very first Plenary Council of Latin America in 1899 and was instrumental in abolishing slavery in Brazil. My friend, papal expert Byron Hoover, who helps me a lot when it comes to papal history suggests that we also add: "Considering that Leo XIII laid the foundation for the Church's teaching on social and economic justice, the papal name Leo assumes even more relevance for the next pope in light of the on-going global financial crisis."

Byron has also repeatedly pointed out that he thinks that 'Leo' is long overdue to be reused. (I have a theory that some pope elects have been bashful to opt for 'Leo' since Leo XIII reigned for 25 years. Both Benedict XVI and John XXIII quipped that their namesakes have had short papacies. So, maybe, others may have been worried that picking 'Leo' might indicate that they are hoping for a long pontificate. Yes, that begs the question about the use of 'Pius,' after Pius IX's unprecedented 31 year papacy. All I can say here is that St. Pius X opted for that name, right after Leo XIII's reign, and categorically said he was doing so to pay tribute to the degradations stoically endured by Pius IX during the Italian unification struggle. That was heartfelt and I think was much appreciated by many. After that, Pius X became the one identified with that name ... until XI came along. )

I do not think that a non-Italian pope-elect will opt for 'Pius.' It is a name that has only been used by Italian popes (though there is no real basis for this). But this is now a part of papal 'lore.' I am also not sure whether even an Italian pope-elect will opt for 'Pius' right now. Though venerated, there is still lingering criticism from some groups about Pius XII's behavior during WW II.

Marcellus III would be appropriate
Marcello Cervini degli Spannochi, who became Marcellus II in 1555, was the last pope to retain his birth name.

No other 'Marks,' after the Roman god of war 'Mars,' have been elected pope since then.

But that would change if Cardinal Marc Ouellet is elected. I have never met the Cardinal, but in the photographs I have seen he has a je ne sais qoui glint in his eyes. He appears to have a sense of humor and appreciate irony. He could thus retain his birth name and do so, with panache, within the 'protocols.' Plus, with 'Marcellus,' he would signify that he has no pretensions of a long pontificate (though we do need the next pope to reign for a lengthy term, per my criteria for only picking papabili that are under the age of 75).

That is all for now. I will refine and extend this posting on a regular basis.

Many thanks for your time.

Anura Guruge

Popes and Religious Order Tertiary Affiliations

Continuing my papabili research I started looking to see if membership of a religious order could in anyway influence electability.

There are 21 cardinal electors that belong to religious orders among them three of my top ten papabili, viz. Cardinals Marc Ouellet (St. Sulpice), Wilfrid Fox Napier (Franciscan), Óscar Rodríguez Maradiaga (Salesians) and Christoph Schönborn (Dominican). I am struck that 40% of my list belong to religious orders compared to 18% of the electors (and 20% of all cardinals) -- especially given that belonging to a religious order does not appear to be a bonus when it come to papal electability.

[Though we have had 5 Franciscan popes and 4 Dominican popes, we haven't had a pope from a religious order since the Camaldolese (Benedictine) Gregory XVI who reigned from 1831 to 1846.]

To get some value-added insight into this I contacted my new friend Byron Hoover. Byron, had contacted me in August of last year, after coming across my 'Pope Names' book on Amazon. Byron, with over 30 years of in-depth study, has encyclopedic knowledge of the popes and papal history. Byron has become a trusted and treasured source on papal history.

Byron surprised me by e-mailing me back with a list of popes who had 'Third Order' relationships with the religious orders. This list included some extremely well known (and relatively recent) popes such as John XXIII, Paul VI, Pius XII and Benedict XV. This was news to me. I rushed off and checked all my trusty references, print and online. None of them mentioned these 'Third Order' [a.k.a. 'tertiary'] affinities.

[The Online (1917) Catholic Encyclopedia has a great article about 'Third Orders' and mentions some of these popes.]

Byron and I talked by phone yesterday. It appears that 'Third Order' affiliations are not well known. For a start, we now realize that we really don't know whether any of the other 93 cardinal electors have religious order affiliations as tertiaries.

Byron has come up with this list of the popes that he is aware of as having 'Third Order' affiliations (and Byron, to his credit, has found some references in sources as far away as 'The Catholic News of the Archdiocese of Singapore').

So here is Byron's current list:

1. Pius IX - Franciscan
2. Leo XIII - Franciscan
3. Pius X - Franciscan
4. Benedict XV - Dominican
5. Pius XII - Dominican
6. John XXIII - Franciscan
7. Paul VI - Franciscan

We need YOUR help, please. Do YOU know of any other popes that had 'Third Order' affiliations?

What about the current cardinals -- in particular the cardinal electors?

IF you wish, you can provide me with the information, confidentially -- and your name will never be divulged. You can leave a comment here and mark it CONFIDENTIAL. Comments do not get published until I review and approve them. If you state it is confidential, I will retain the data but not publish your comment. Or you can send me a confidential e-mail to: anu@wownh.com.

I will, of course, share the information with Byron. In many ways, this is Byron's list. So Byron will be always involved and engaged on this topic.

We hope we hear from you. Many thanks.

Anura Guruge

Next Pope -- My Papabili List for 2009

After much research and soul searching this is my top ten papabili list for the first half of 2009.

Cardinal's name (age at 2009 birthday), country and current post:

  1. Odilo Pedro Scherer (60), Brazil,
      Archbishop of Sao Paulo

  2. Ennio Antonelli (73), Italy,
      President, Council for the Family (Roman Curia)

  3. Marc Ouellet (65), Canada,
     Archbishop of Québec

  4. Wilfrid Fox Napier (68), South Africa,
      Archbishop of Durban

  5. Angelo Scola (68), Italy,
      Patriarch of Venice

  6. Philippe Xavier Barbarin (59), France,
      Archbishop of Lyon << youngest >>

  7. Óscar Rodríguez Maradiaga (67), Honduras,
      Archbishop of Tegucigalpa

  8. Christoph Schönborn (64), Austria,
      Archbishop of Vienna

  9. Agostino Vallini (69), Italy,
      Vicar General of Rome

 10. José da Cruz Policarpo (73), Portugal,
       Patriarch of Lisbon << oldest >>

If you want more details about these cardinals, which should, to an extent, explain my rankings, I suggest you start at Salvador Miranda's outstanding "The Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church" Web site. You can find some of my rationales for these picks and their rankings over here. Given that I am associated with analyzing papal names, I set about working out what the names of these papabili meant. You can find that over here.

Yes, I am acutely aware of all of the dangers of publishing papabili lists, particularly ahead of a sede vacante, including the one that came to be during Pope John Paul II's 26 year papacy -- i.e., "the pope invariably outlives those that speculate about his successors!"

But we were in need of a more representative list than those that were available on the Web. Most of the lists are essentially leftovers from the 2005 conclave and for a start, do not reflect the cardinals appointed by Pope Benedict XVI. I also felt that this site, as opposed to those involved in online betting, will provide readers with the opportunity for leaving comments. It can thus serve as an 'open' forum for evaluating these rankings.

My plan (and see the warning above) is to update this list on a regular basis -- particularly if I receive germane feedback from you all.

Grace, and may peace be with you all.

Thank you for your time.

Anura Guruge

Catholic News Agency Reviews My 'Pope Names' Book

I was happy to see this review by Brother Benet S. Exton of St. Gregory's University, Shawnee, Oklahoma:

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/column.php?n=527

You can get the book from Amazon:

To Order Book from Amazon

Thank you.

Anura Guruge

Sedes Stercoraria -- A More Plausible Explantion

Sedes Stercoraria is a chair with a rather large hole cut into its seat.

Sedes comes from the Latin for 'seat' (as with sede vacante) while Stercoraria can be best interpreted as having to do with the posterior. A picture of a Sedes Stercoraria shown at this link clearly illustrates why one would call this a 'posterior related seat.'

It is said that popes, c. 11th century, upon being elected had to sit on a Sedes Stercoraria so that their masculinity could be verified. That Sedes Stercoraria did exist is not in debate. The Vatican Museum and the Parisian Lourve are both claimed to have  extant examples from Rome's St. John Lateran, then, and even now, the official cathedral of the Pope.

Sedes Stercoraria is seen by some as validating the claim that there had been a female pope, viz. 'Pope Joan.'  The way they see it, a Sedes Stercoraria was needed to preclude the possibility of another female from becoming pope.

I do not believe that there was a 'Pope Joan.' I say so, without demur, on page 82 of my "Popes and the Tale of Their Names" book. I have not been able to find a credible gap in the documented series of 9th century papacies to justify her presence, nor any pope or antipope named 'John' that could have been female.

Yesterday while responding to an e-mail about 'Pope Joan' and the Sedes Stercoraria it suddenly dawned on me that there is indeed a very plausible explanation as to why a Sedes Stercoraria may have been used.

If it was indeed used, it was to check for masculinity not in the context of gender -- but in the context of 'intactness.'

The First Council of Nicaea [Turkey], in 325, the very first of the ecumenical councils, was convoked by Emperor Constantine the Great (306-337), the liberator of Christianity, who even attended some of the sessions. The primary goal of this council, which was attended by 1,800 bishops, was to satisfactorily resolve the 'Arian controversy;' i.e. the exact nature of the relationship between the Father and the Son. In addition to formulating the Nicene Creed, that codified the faith and rebuked Arianism, this Council also implemented twenty new canon laws. The very first of these was the prohibition of self-castration!

Castration would appear to debar one from being a priest. This may have been a custom inherited from the very early days of Judaism.

Mutilation of rivals to impede them from performing certain functions was a somewhat prevalent trait during the Middle Ages. Pope Leo III (795-816), for example, was viscously attacked four years after his unanimous election. Among other atrocities, they tried to cut off his tongue so that he would not be able to conduct his duties as pope.

Against such a backdrop one could understand why there might have been a desire to make sure that a pope-elect had not been previously mutilated.

So, I think, that the Sedes Stercoraria, if used, had nothing to do with the ascertaining of gender. Instead, it was probably a means to establish that a pope-elect was 'unaltered.'

Thank You.

Anura Guruge

 

The Next Election, The Next Pope

With my 'Pope Names' book now readily available, I am spending much of time thinking ahead to the next papal election, whenever it may be -- and hopefully it won't be soon.

Though Pope Benedict XVI, now 81, does not make the 'top 10' of the oldest popes, one has to remember that when elected, three days after his 78th birthday, he was the 5th oldest to have been elected in the last 500 years. Furthermore, taking the lead from Pope John XXIII, Pope Benedict did quip that the prior Benedict had served but briefly [i.e. 7 years and 4 months]. So to start thinking ahead to the next election, hopefully to be ahead of the curve with the facts, dynamics and potential 'politics,' is not unreasonable, and in no way macabre.

I have some very germane posts on my Papal Election specific BLOG. You may want to check those out.  I show you where you can find the real odds for the next pope and the accuracy of these odds.

Given that cardinals lose their right to vote when they turn 80, I highlight the inexactness of the current Vatican rules in calculating this crucial 80th birthday. I also give you a heads up that some of the lists on the 'College of Cardinals' may not be up to date.

Talking of which, I am continuing my painstaking, hand checking of 'College of Cardinals' list. Yesterday, I was making sure that all the 'geographic' references were accurate. During that process I was struck by the potential 'disenfranchisement' of certain smaller nations. For example, right now, Slovakia has two cardinals. That looks good. But they are both over 80. Therefore, they cannot vote. The same is true for Belarus, Nicaragua, Puerto Rico, Ecuador, Angola, Mozambique, Uganda, Madagascar, Ivory Coast, Mauritius Islands, Egypt, Taiwan and Lebanon. They all have a cardinal each, but in each case that cardinal is over 80. I could be wrong, but I can see people getting upset that their 'community' won't have a say in the next election.

This issue cannot be easily fixed! There can ONLY BE 120 cardinal electors. That is, at present, sacrosanct -- unless Pope Benedict XVI opts to change it. Right now there are 116 cardinals under 80. So, per the current rules, there can only be four more under-80 cardinals inducted -- until next January when the next cardinal turns 80.

Thank you.

Anura Guruge

My "Popes and the Tale of Their Names" Book

I started studying papal history, in earnest, a few years ago.  It didn't take long before I was getting confounded (more than usual) by a lack of specificity when it came to papal names. Though there is an Everest of work on the popes, much of it the result of meticulous research, I kept on drawing blanks when I wanted to dig into matters related to papal names.

I was struck that the sixth 'pope' to succeed St. Peter was named Sixtus I -- given that 'sixtus,' in Latin, denotes sixth. I was surprised that St. Irenaeus, the Bishop of Lyon (c. 178), one of the early writers on Christianity, when enumerating the Bishops of Rome that followed the Apostles wrote, without expressing any surprise that: "... then, sixth from the Apostles, Sixtus was appointed; ..." [In Adversus Haereses (Against Heresies) Vol III, Chapter 3, Paragraph 3.]

The sixth after St. Peter being named 'Sixtus' seemed rather propitious.

Then there was St. Anacletus, the second 'pope' after St. Peter, who was listed in the martyrs celebrated at Mass as just 'Cletus.' That appeared to have been quite a slip, particularly given that 'Anacletus' is a Greek word for 'blameless' -- an attribute that St. Paul had said was a prerequisite for a bishop in <Titus 1:7>. Yes, it was true that freed slaves were often called 'Anacletus,' because of the blameless aspect, but that alone would not explain why this early 'pope' was referred to by two names -- especially when this resulted in people thinking that there has been two separate 'popes,' one Greek, one Roman, one called 'Cletus' and the other 'Anacletus.' Being an ex-slave was not an impediment to becoming a pope. St. Callistus I (sometimes Callixtus I), best known now for the Roman catacombs named after him, was well known as a slave.

Then there was St. Zephyrinus. He became 'pope' at a time when there was growing tension between Rome and the churches in the East -- to do with when Easter should be celebrated. 'Zephyrinus' is Greek for the West Wind. So a 'pope' that is elected at a time when the West is trying to impose its wishes on the East just happened to have a name that connotes changes from the West.

My curiosity, akin to that that killed the cat, was aroused.

I had to start looking into papal names, their meaning and the history of papal name changes.

The outcome of that research is this book "The Popes and the Tale of Their Names."

I could, as ever, be wrong, but I think you will like this book. It has a lot of brand new information. I even managed to come up with the rationales for all 125 documented papal name changes -- with only about 30%,  clearly demarcated,  being  suppositions on my part. I also came up with a revised history of papal name changes.

Lets take Julius II, the so called 'warrior pope,' who gave us Michelangelo's immortal Sistine Chapel ceiling. You will find claims that he assumed this name because he admired Julius Caesar or wanted to follow in the footsteps of the 4th century pope St. Julius I. In reality he did not change his name! Julius is not an assumed name. His birth name was Giuliano della Rovere -- with 'Giuliano' being an Italian variant of  'Julius.'  So he is another 16th century pope, along with Hadrian VI and Marccellus II, that retained his birth name. You will be hard pressed to find this anywhere else than in my book.

Written by Anura Guruge