Popes and the Papacy

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.

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.

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 and the rationale as to  explain my rankings please consult my latest book (February 2010), 'The Next Pope'.

Please click here to visit the home page for this book.

This papabili list is a key component of this book. The first chapter, titled 'The Papabili' goes into the criteria I used to select my current top 10 in addition to providing biographies that highlight their qualifications.

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