Popes and the Papacy

The Next Cardinal Creating Consistory – Looking At Trends Since 1903 [Part II]

by Anura Guruge

For Part I of this consistory thread

As of today [March 18, 2010] it has been 2 years and 3 months [845 days to be precise] since there has been a cardinal creating consistory – Benedict XVI's (#266) last having been on November 24, 2007 – during which he created 23 cardinals, five of them non-voting [i.e., they were already over 80].

After that consistory there were 201 cardinals, 120 of them eligible to vote – Paul VI (#263) having specified a 120 elector maximum (though John Paul II (#265) unhesitatingly exceeded this twice). [q.v., pages 123-124 of 'The Next Pope' book on Google Books.]

As of today [March 18, 2010] we are down to 182 cardinals of which 110 are electors.

On March 20 we will lose another elector, and yet another by the end of the month – two birthdays coming up close together. Twelve more will turn 80 within the next 12 months.

These the least number of electors since Paul VI enacted the 80 year cut-off rule – effective as of January 1, 1971.

But there are no rules or even norms saying that you need close to 110 electors.

Between 1586 and 1958 the total size of the College was capped at 70!

The chances are that the pope will hold a cardinal creating consistory within the next year. But, he has to also deal with the ongoing sex abuse scandal. Creating cardinals in this current climate is unlikely to be well received. He will also have to be ultra careful as to who he creates to avoid any accusations that he is rewarding prelates who may have been aware of some of the problems. So this is a big issue. There is also the matter of costs. Creating cardinals costs money – for the Vatican, as does holding a consistory. So these are all factors.

The following two tables provide cardinal creating consistory trends as of Pius X (#258) in 1903. Click on them to make them bigger.

The Next Cardinal Creating Consistory – Looking At Trends Since 1900 [Part I]

by Anura Guruge

John Paul II (#265) held his first cardinal creation consistory on June 30, 1979 – 257 days [8 months] following his election. It was the first such consistory of the twentieth century to be held on a Saturday. The prior 27 such consistories going back to March 24, 1924 had all been held on a Monday.

Prior to John Paul II, Monday, by far, was the most popular day for cardinal creation consistories.

Since 1900 we have had 55 cardinal creation consistories. 42 [76%] of these were held on Mondays. Here is the distribution:


John Paul II liked to create cardinals on a Saturday. 4 of his 9 cardinal creation consistories were held on a Saturday.

His 'protégé,' Benedict XVI (#266) appears to be partial to this trend. One of his but two cardinal creating consistories was on a Saturday [Nov. 24, 2007] while the other was on a Friday [Mar. 24, 2006].

John Paul II was also partial to February 21 and June 28. He held successive consistories on those days, June 28, 1988 & 1991 and February 21, 1998 & 2001. No other pope had done this, since 1900, probably because of the 'tradition' to have cardinal creation consistories on a Monday. Pius XI (#260), who held 17 cardinal creation consistories, did hold two on December 16 – i.e., 1929 & 1935, but these were separated by two others in 1930 and 1933. Both of Pius XI's December 16 consistories were on a Monday.

John XXIII (#262) held two successive cardinal creating consistories on adjoining days in December; December 15, 1958 & December 14, 1959. Both were Mondays.

Paul VI (#263), John XXIII (#262), Pius XII (#261), Benedict XV (#259) and Pius X (#258) only held cardinal creating consistories on Mondays.

15 of the 17 such consistories held by Pius XI (#260) were also on Mondays. He was the first twentieth century pope to deviate from the 'always on a Monday' trend. His second cardinal creating consistory was on a Wednesday and the third on a Sunday. This is the only such consistory on a Sunday.

There may have been a significance to February 21 and June 28. Each preceded a major Vatican-related feast day. February 22 is the feast day for the 'Chair of St. Peter,' while June 29 is the feast days for Saints Peter and Paul.

December and June, traditionally, have been the most popular months for cardinal creation consistories.

December consistories, prior to Christmas, makes sense. But the last one was in 1959. The 'earliest' cardinal creating consistory we have had is January 12 – and that was in 1953 [the year of my birth]. The closest we have had one to Christmas was on December 20, 1926. Three years earlier there was also one on December 30. In each instance just two cardinals were created. Both of these were called by Pius XI, who was partial to December consistories, 8 of his 17 having been during this holiday month.

Pius XI was also parsimonious in his creation of cardinals – part of it being that he wished to stay within the 70 cardinal limit set by Sixtus V (#228) in 1586. In 7 of his 17 consistories he created just two cardinals. In one, on July 15, 1929, he created but one! Pius X had also done that. In December 2, 1912. The recent popes, unhindered by a ceiling on the size of the College, have been more generous. The least number of cardinals created at a given consistory by John Paul II and Benedict XVI is 15. Pius XI only went above 15 once. Benedict XV never exceed 11 at a single consistory. The 42 cardinals created by John Paul II in his February 21, 2001 consistory was more than all the cardinals created by Benedict XV in his 5 consistory.

Here is the distribution for the 55 such consistories since 1900.

The Next Pope -- The Book by Anura Guruge, Publisher of This Blog

'The Next Pope -- After Pope Benedict XVI' by Anura Guruge, 322 letter size pages, 1.7 pounds [.77kg], 150,000 words is meant to be the definitive, no stones left unturned handbook for the next papal election -- whenever that may occur (hopefully later than sooner).

This book, my second second papal, is in many ways an adjunct to this blog. The book was inspired by the interest afforded to some of the posts on this blog -- in particular to my list of papabili. This book augments the information I am able to provide on this blog.

There will be a permanent, fixed page on this blog that will serve as the portal (or gateway) to this book. It is titled 'The Next Pope' and you can visit it by clicking <here>.

In this book I describe, in detail, my rationale for picking the papabili that I did. I also provide biographies of my ten papabili to illustrate and highlight their credentials.

This book, as was the case with my 'Popes and the Tale of Their Names,' contains a significant amount of unique information and a lot of hitherto uncaptured statistics.

You can find a detailed Table of Contents (ToC) and previews at the portal. From my perspective this book is a collaboration with you ... my readers. My goal is to satisfy your needs and curiosity. Nearly every topic I have covered in this blog has been expanded upon in this book. I would contend that at least 20% of what is in this book is new or refined information.

I have also ventured into hitherto unchartered territory; e.g., in addition to providing a detailed analysis of John Paul II's 1996 Universi Dominici Gregis Apostolic Constitution that will govern the next sede vacante I also point out the inconsistencies in this Constitution! Yes, this constitution isn't as watertight as one would assume, let alone hope. Even the most inexperienced US corporate lawyer would not have allowed this document to go out in this form. But, that is the beauty of an Apostolic Constitution. Though legally binding, within the Church, it is still but a covenant between the Pope and his flock rather than being a sterile legal contract.

Your comments on the book will be most appreciated. You can use the comment feature of this blog or email me directly at: anu@wownh.com.

As with 'Popes and the Tale of Their Names' my goal with this book was to enhance, expand and educate. Per my style I labored to present the information in accurate, consistent form with lots of tables and statistics. Please have a look at the Previews I provide. Click <here>.

Thank you. All the best.

Anura Guruge
www.guruge.com

Grace, and may peace be with you.

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. My latest book, 'The Next Pope' contains over 33,000 words (65 letter size pages) on the history and role of cardinals.

I also should mention that a couple of weeks ago we went past the 22,000 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 to 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