Vatican Diary / Resignation of the Pope. Theory and Practice
The Chiesa
VATICAN CITY, March 16, 2012 – A bit of buzz has been generated around two articles that appeared recently in Italy, advancing the hypothesis that Benedict XVI might resign, in part for the sake of influencing the choice of his successor. The authors of these articles are Giuliano Ferrara, in the newspaper that he directs, "Il Foglio," on March 10: [] and Antonio Socci in the newspaper "Libero," on March 11: [] Ferrara is not a believer, Socci is a militant Catholic. Both are known for their sincere admiration of pope Joseph Ratzinger. But beyond the good intentions of both, the hypothesis that they foreshadow does not appear to have any foundation. For one thing, because anyone who has had an opportunity to meet with Benedict XVI, including after the publication of the two articles, has not at all gotten the impression of being in the presence of a pope who is thinking about resigning. Far from it. Both because of his ability to grasp the necessary connections for every act of governance, and because of the temporally unrestricted scope with which, always "God willing," he proceeds in the leadership of the universal Church. And then because nothing is more foreign to the history and personality of Ratzinger than the very thought of maneuvering, even with noble intentions, for his own succession. This hypothesis is canonically "subversive." The only legitimate way for a pontiff to influence the selection of the future pope lies in the creation of cardinals. And running through the names of those chosen by Benedict XVI from 2006 until today, it does not appear that there is a clear plan to mortgage the future conclave, which in the "mens" of Ratzinger, as in that of every good believer, must be entrusted above all to the Holy Spirit. Having said that, the fact remains that in the book-interview "Light of the World," published in November of 2010, Benedict XVI affirms (reiterating a thought that he expressed before being elected to the see of Peter): "If a pope clearly realizes that he is no longer physically, psychologically, and spiritually capable of carrying out the duties of his office, then he has the right, and in some circumstances the obligation, to resign." It is the code of canon law itself that provides for this case, at canon 332 paragraph 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." More complicated is the case in which the pope is stricken with a disabling illness that prevents him from communicating in some way, or makes him incapable of understanding and willing. There are no public norms (but there could be confidential protocols) that would regulate this case and therefore establish, among other things, what authority would have the faculty of declaring the pope to be under impediment. It seems that it has been thought that this "legislative vacuum" could be filled with a sort of "blank" letter of resignation signed by the pope in advance, to be used in the case of a serious disabling illness. Documents in this vein were published in 2010 in the book "Perche e santo. Il vero Giovanni Paolo II raccontato dal postulatore della causa di beatificazione," written by Monsignor Slawomir Oder with Saverio Gaeta for the publisher Rizzoli: [] But even the resignation of a pope provided for by canon law is simple only in theory. Not in practice. John Paul II once said that in the Church "there is no place for a pope emeritus." And Cardinal Franz Koenig told the German press agency DPA in November of 1996: "The pope knows, and he has said, that the election of a new pope while the old one is still alive would represent a problem. One pope in retirement, another in the Vatican: the people would wonder which one counts." In effect, it should suffice simply to imagine what would happen if a "pope" emeritus were to continue to pen articles and give interviews like a Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini, or write books and memoirs like a Cardinal Giacomo Biffi. This is why even a pope like Paul VI, who had seriously embraced the idea of resigning, ultimately did not do so. In September of 1997, Cardinal Paolo Dezza, who was pope Montini's confessor, recalled about the resignation: "He would have resigned, but he told me, 'It would be a trauma for the Church,' so he didn't have the courage to do it" With John Paul II, the talk of resignation began after the assassination attempt in 1981. Then a strong second wave of speculation came in 1995, on the occasion of his 75th birthday. On both of these occasions, the official reactions of the Vatican communication agencies were of denial, often ironic. It was in 2000 that the idea of his resignation started to be revisited not by media outlets, but by prominent churchmen. In January of that year, it was Bishop Karl Lehmann, made a cardinal the following year, who said: "I believe that the pope himself, if he had the feeling that he was no longer able to lead the Church responsibly, I believe that then he would have the strength and the courage to say, I can no longer fulfill my task as needed." The following October, the Belgian cardinal Godfried Danneels added: "I would not be surprised if the pope were to retire after 2000." On May 16, 2002, it was Ratzinger himself, at the time the prefect of the congregation for the doctrine of the faith, who did not rule out, in case his health deteriorated, an early retirement of John Paul II, in a statement to "Muenchner Kirchenzeitung," the weekly of the archdiocese of Munich and Freising: "If the pope saw that he absolutely couldn't do it anymore, then of course he would resign." On the same day, a similar idea was expressed in another interview by Honduran cardinal Oscar Andres Rodriguez Maradiaga. On February 7, 2005, cardinal secretary of state Angelo Sodano, to the question from journalists of whether pope Karol Wojtyla had thought of resigning, answered: "Let's leave this to the conscience of the pope." In the current pontificate, the speculation over a papal resignation has not yet come to the point of being discussed publicly by senior churchmen. But on a journalistic level it has. Before the two latest articles by Ferrara and Socci, in fact, it had been written about by Socci (in "Libero" of September 25, 2011) and by the vaticanista Marco Politi in a recent book highly critical of the current pontificate. In any case, for those who would like to explore the canonical and practical implications of the resignation of a pontiff, or those regarding the case of a pope prevented from continuing his mission, two scholarly articles appeared in 2000 in the weekly "America" of the Jesuits of New York. The first appeared in the March 25 issue, with the byline of Kenneth E. Untener, bishop of Saginaw, who passed away in 2004 at the age of 67: [] The second was published posthumously, in the September 30 issue, with the byline of Monsignor James H. Provost, a professor of canon law at the Catholic University of America, who passed away at the age of 60 on August 26, 2000: > What if the Pope became disabled? https://www.americamagazine.org/content/article.cfm?article_id=2200 __________ All of the articles from www.chiesa regarding the central government of the Catholic Church: > Focus on THE VATICAN __________ English translation by Matthew Sherry, Ballwin, Missouri, U.S.A.
|
.
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.