Paolo Rodari of Palazzo Apostolico has an interesting piece today about a possible consistory in which Benedict XVI would name new cardinals, thus giving a indication about a future successor. Rodari’s focus is on Europe, but it is interesting for everyone.
Rodari is guessing that a consistory would be on the vigil of the Solemnity of Christ the King next November.
Right now there are 111 eligible as electors in a conclave should it be necessary … quod Deus avertat. The number set by Paul VI is 120, but a Pope can make as many cardinals as he sees fit.
Quite a few cardinals are coming up to their 80th birthday, when they will no longer be permitted to enter a conclave.
Rodari speaks of those who are not yet cardinals but whose office makes it a lock that they will be elevated to the sacred purple.
Then there are the wild card[inal]s, as it were. In Rodari’s list there are a couple conspicuous absences.
Loading ...
I am happy to see my bishop on that list! –Carolus Neo-Eboracensis (Carolus Novi-Portus Natus)
I am surprised to see Archbishop Dolan on the list, especially since Cardinal Egan is still eligible to vote in the conclave, and thus if it were to happen, New York would have 2 voting Cardinals.
I can’t read Italian, but saw a reference to Raymond Burke?
Well well, some speculation by Rodari.
I think B16 could do it in June but then there would still be more deserving ones so November looks possible. why not expand the voters to 130? 10 difference would be good and allow a greater range for any conclave.
But I still wonder why malta is always left out. A 99% catholic country that has not had the scandals of Ireland inflicted upon it by wayward clergy and yet it still has no cardinal.
When will Malta get a cardinal like all other predominantly catholic states?
Better than havng more curial officials raised to the red hat.
I think B16 could do some surprises. besides, all this talk of Pell moving to Rome may well not happen. I think it is highly unlikely to happen. Sydney, melbourne and canberra have had SEVEN archbishops in office in the last 10 years. That is just crazy. Melbourne has had three archbishops in that last 12 years, one of whom was Pell – he has had more moves than a revolving door.
But will B16 gove NY and Westminster red hats while their predecessors are still under 80? This is always an awkward problem when a cardinal goes out of office well before 80.
I’m puzzled by Fr Z.’s comment:
“The number set by Paul VI is 120, but a Pope can make as many cardinals as he sees fit”
Does that just mean that any Pope could change the 120 rule? Or does it just mean that there can be more than 120 cardinals because those over 80 can’t vote (under the current rules)?
Or does it mean that there could be more than 120 cardinals under 80? If so, what happens? Presumably unless the 120 rule s changed, the 121st will be excluded from voting until someone else has dropped out through old age. If so, if there are more than 121, in what order do the “excess” ones come in as the older ones hit 80? Date they became cardinal? Age? Rank (Cardinal Priest before Cardinal Deacon)? Date they were made Bishop? Or priest?
Can anyone help?
I was hoping for October but was thinking it might be November. Archbishop Burke is definitely a shoo-in, and while I still think Archbishop Dolan might have a shot at it, Cardinal Egan notwithstanding given the fact that it is New York, but I still it’s a long shot at that. I agree with Father Z’s earlier prediction that Archbishop Wuerl will not be on the list and will go so far to predict that he won’t be after Cardinal Keeler reaches 80.
It will also be interesting to see those over 80 the Pope appoints. While many people consider these honorary appointments, I think they speak volumes about the kind of men this Pope wishes his priests and bishops to emulate. Men such as Cardinal Dulles and others were always choices that sent a message to the Church about the direction of the Church. I know this sounds far-fetched, but what about men such as Archbishop Giuseppe De Andrea, former apostolic nuncio to Kuwait, Yemen, Bahrain, and Qatar and Apostolic Delegate to the Arabian Peninsula? Interestingsly, Archbishop De Andrea was actually ordained a priest for the Diocese of Greensburg and served there for many years. These unsung heroes of the Church are certainly worthy of recognition.
Sorry for the double post, but Archbishop Sambi has almost completed the long backlog of appointments of bishops to existing vacant sees to the U.S. I’m wondering if he might soon be “moving on” back to Italy to a curial position that might merit him a red hat by November as well? At 72 and not quite at retirement age, he’d have a good 8 years or so.
“Does that just mean that any Pope could change the 120 rule?”
Yes, or make a temporary exception as John Paul did.
“Or does it mean that there could be more than 120 cardinals under 80? If so, what happens?”
It basically means the Pope has temporarily lifted the 120 rule. They would all still vote if he died.
Which is why the 120 rule is meaningless. The Pope can’t bind himself like that, so it is really more just like a personal goal the Pope sets to restrain his own cardinal-creating exuberance…but if he wants to lift it or make exceptions, he always can.
When speaking of residential Archbishops of Sees that usually lead to appointment to the Cardinalate, we must remember that the recent practice of the Holy See has been of not elevating the a Archbishop to the Cardinalate while the See’s Archbishop emeritus is still under the 80 years old age limit. According to this praxis, only after the Archbishop emeritus ceases to be a Cardinal elector, the new Archbishop gets a red hat.
If that praxis remains in use, some of Rodari’s predictions regarding residential Archbishops won’t materialize. My city’s Archdiocese (Rio de Janeiro), for instance, is currently led by Archbishop Orani João Tempesta, but there are two living Cardinals who are Archbishops emeriti. Rodari predicts Tempesta’s elevation to the Sacred College, but one of the two Archbishops emerit, Cardinal Eusébio Scheid, is still a Cardinal elector, and will only be 80 years old in December 2012. So, if the example of the See of Paris serves as a precedent, I would say that my Archbishop is not likely to receive a red hat yet. After all, in Paris, now Cardinal 23 wasn’t raised to the Sacred College while Paris still had a Cardinal elector as its Archbishop emeritus.
Will the Metropolitan Archbishop of Colombo in Sri Lanka get a red hat. I hope so. Mons. Ranjith deserves one.
And it will probably be apparent that Detroit will no longer be a cardinalitial see. Ah, the vicissitudes of times and places. Abp. Vigneron will (quietly) regret it for the sake of his city, but not for himself.
Why will Detroit no longer be a cardinalatial see? I’m sure there is something I’m missing here. Clue me in please.
Because it’s shrinking and falling apart literally.
Poor Detroit. What a tragedy. I was wondering if St. Louis was a bit premature, since it experienced a bit of a revival with the appointments of then Arcbhbishops Rigali and Burke, but now it seems that St. Louis is a “stepping stone diocese.”
Paolo Romeo has two strikes against him. He did not complete the usual five years of a nuncio in Canada.. He was then returned to Italy as nuncio where he, at the instance of the Secretariat of State (if not the former secretary himself), he sent a letter to the Italian bishops seeking their thoughts on a new president for the Italian Bishops conference. He very quickly had an unexpected audience with the Pope!!!
As for Ravasi see this comment on Rorate-Coeli:
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2007_08_01_archive.html
A disciple of Cardinal Martini is not likely to get a red hat from
this Pope.
John Ashley
When Detroit was made a Cardinalatial see it was the 4th largest city in the US, it is now 11th and falling (after the census, I suspect it’ll be down near 15th). Interestingly, the 4th largest city is now Houston, recently given a red hat. Detroit (the Archdiocese, not the city) still has a large Catholic population, but we also have two relatively healthy retired Cardinals in residence. I doubt that we’ll get a red hat again, but I am almost certain that if we do, it won’t happen while Maida and Szoka are alive.
Benedict XVI has shown himself reluctant to go past the limit of 120, and I can’t see him making a change in that at this point (perhaps one or two over).
While Archbishop Burke is on most lists, there have been Prefects of the Signatura who were not Cardinals. Recently, for example, Burke’s good friend Cardinal Grocholewski was not named a Cardinal until after he left the Signatura and took over the Congregation for Education. I fully expect Burke to be made a Cardinal, but if he’s not raised this time around, that’s not necessarily a sign of disfavor (though if he’s not named, you can be sure that the National Catholic Distorter will trumpet it as such).
For the record, and lest repetition of an error lend it acceptance, the word is “cardinalitial”. Think “cardinalitas” (Lat., probably Late, possibly unattested) and you’ll get it right.
I never claimed not to be a pedant. lol