Benedict's privileges in the future?

[Marauder]

What I’m finding interesting is that within the inner structure of the Church, such as where I find myself, sharing with priests, bishops, sisters, brothers and lay employees of the Church, no one has talked about this resignation for more than 10 minutes today. Everything was business as usual.

Also found it interesting the type of talk that happened at that the first Secular Franciscan event I attended after the announcement was a funeral for a deceased member of the fraternity. Like you said, it was brought up but only mentioned for about 10 minutes total. Most of the talk wasn’t about concern about the Pope himself, the Church or anything like that it. It was only about the poor treatment by the press (i…e bringing up ever minor flaw during his tenure and not bringing up the good.)

Conversation basically went like:
Person 1: Did you hear about the Popes resignation?
Person 2: Yeah, I can’t believe how bad the media is treating it.
(Other people around briefly discuss how bad the media is treating it.)

Within 10 minutes back to talking about the Franciscan wake service that is getting ready to happen.

 

[sw85]

We’re treading uncharted waters here. It’s hard to tell what policies the Vatican will adopt.

I certainly believe that Cardinal Ratzinger is a very discreet man and will not do anything that would upstage the next pope. How others see it is difficult to predict.

I hope that he will publish, because I’m not going to be around much longer and I love his work. If they decide to publish after I’m gone, heck I’ll feel cheated. :yup:

Heavenly eternity is a long time to catch up on reading, brother!

 

[OraLabora]

The man is an absolute genius.

It’s probably been said elsewhere on the forum, but our abbot confirms, after meeting the Holy Father briefly at the last General Chapter of abbots in Rome, that one went to Rome to see John Paul II, and one goes to Rome to hear Benedict XVI.

 

[mburn16]

“When and if he renounces the Papacy, this can be replaced by the three-layer pope-style mitre of Paul VI.”

I’m a little confused. Benedict’s Coat of Arms has always used the “pope-style” mitre, even as Pontiff. It wouldn’t change anything, and therefore, would not distinguish between reigning Pope and Pope Emeritus.

Heraldry is a delicate thing, of which I enjoy but know only modest amounts of. Very small changes in a coat of arms change the whole meaning (see the minor royals of the House of Windsor).

I suggest removing the keys and replacing the red crosses of the Pallium with Black crosses. I can’t remember whether Bishops’ mitres usually have the strips of cloth like the the Tiara (and the Papal mitre) does…but if not, remove them too.

---

As far as reference goes, I’ve suggested he would keep “your holiness”, but lose “holy father”. It seems appropriate. “Former Pope Benedict XVI” works well from a reference standpoint, since I think that is what will be used most frequently (At least by laymen) anyway.

---

I’ve also seen a lot of question about what color he would be entitled to wear…white, red, purple, etc. - I can’t help but wonder whether it wouldn’t be most appropriate to provide him with a new cassock design of white trimmed in purple or black, either without a “belt”, or one in the color of the trim.

 

[MarkThompson]

I can’t remember whether Bishops’ mitres usually have the strips of cloth like the the Tiara (and the Papal mitre) does…but if not, remove them too.

They do. They are called lappets.

 

[Bookcat]

Q: Benedict’s privileges in the future?

A: Certainly full use of the Vatican Library and Secret Archives!

 

[YoungTradCath]

I’m a little confused. Benedict’s Coat of Arms has always used the “pope-style” mitre, even as Pontiff. It wouldn’t change anything, and therefore, would not distinguish between reigning Pope and Pope Emeritus.

I mean that in the future the reigning Pontiff can use a tiara on his coat of arms. Retired popes, if any, can replace that with the pope-style mitre while they are still alive, then when they die, they can again resume the tiara.

 

[mburn16]

I mean that in the future the reigning Pontiff can use a tiara on his coat of arms. Retired popes, if any, can replace that with the pope-style mitre while they are still alive, then when they die, they can again resume the tiara.

No, I understand this part. The reason I’m confused is why this would be the case. The point I was trying to make was that, if the intent is to differentiate a reigning or retired but living Pontiff, you probably need to look elsewhere to make the change…because as this Pope has shown, the form of the Tiara or Mitre does nothing to distinguish whether or not one is currently the Pope.

 

[MarkThompson]

I mean that in the future the reigning Pontiff can use a tiara on his coat of arms.

Are you sure you don’t just mean that in the future you want the reigning Pontiff to use a tiara on his coat of arms?

 

[mburn16]

I don’t particularly care what a Pontiff puts on his coat of arms…as long as he puts one on his head. Pray to God we will see the restoration of the Tiara next month…I just can’t help but think that its abandonment gave the outward appearance of reducing the proper status of the Papacy.

 

[YoungTradCath]

Are you sure you don’t just mean that in the future you want the reigning Pontiff to use a tiara on his coat of arms?

Are you sure you don’t just mean you’re overlooking a simple, easy solution to a headscratcher and aren’t considering what I said on its own merits?

For the record, I’d like it, yes. I wouldn’t be too fazed if it doesn’t happen, but it’s a pretty simple solution.

 

[JReducation]

Heavenly eternity is a long time to catch up on reading, brother!

Just my luck, there won’t be a library or Kindle.

I’m a little confused. Benedict’s Coat of Arms has always used the “pope-style” mitre, even as Pontiff. It wouldn’t change anything, and therefore, would not distinguish between reigning Pope and Pope Emeritus.

He will not be “Pope Emeritus” He will be the Bishop of Rome Emeritus. You can’t have two living popes.

---

As far as reference goes, I’ve suggested he would keep “your holiness”, but lose “holy father”. It seems appropriate. “Former Pope Benedict XVI” works well from a reference standpoint, since I think that is what will be used most frequently (At least by laymen) anyway.

He will become His Eminence Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger

---

I’ve also seen a lot of question about what color he would be entitled to wear…white, red, purple, etc. - I can’t help but wonder whether it wouldn’t be most appropriate to provide him with a new cassock design of white trimmed in purple or black, either without a “belt”, or one in the color of the trim.

Like Pope Gregory before him, he returns to wearing the cardinal’s robes, because he’s a secular priest. Pope Celestine returned to wearing the habit of a brother, because he was a religious brother, even though he was a bishop after his abdication. He was never a cardinal to begin with. He could not don the cardinal’s robes.

 

[mburn16]

IS He still a Cardinal though? Isn’t tradition for the Pope to bestow his red hat upon one of the officials of the conclave upon election?

That to me suggests that he no longer holds that position.

 

[JReducation]

IS He still a Cardinal though? Isn’t tradition for the Pope to bestow his red hat upon one of the officials of the conclave upon election?

That to me suggests that he no longer holds that position.

The hat is as a gift, not that he’s no longer a prince of the Church. Let’s take this in small pieces. Peter in the Prince of the Apostles. The Apostles themselves are princes. The pope does not cease to be a prince, because he takes over the Chair of Peter. Upon his abdication, he returns to where he was before the election.

Having said that, what people are mistaking is the terminology. He will not be a retired pope. Popes cannot retire as we understand retirement. In Canon Law, the original term in Latin means to renounce. The translation into English sounds very negative. The word retire has been inserted. If you read the Code in Latin or in one of the Romance Languages, the term is renounce. Since he renounces the Petrine Ministry, he is no longer a pope of any kind, active or retired.

However, he has never renounced his place in the College of Cardinals. He continues to be a member of the College, even as pope. That’s the whole concept of collegiality.

 

[YoungTradCath]

The hat is as a gift, not that he’s no longer a prince of the Church. Let’s take this in small pieces. Peter in the Prince of the Apostles. The Apostles themselves are princes. The pope does not cease to be a prince, because he takes over the Chair of Peter. Upon his abdication, he returns to where he was before the election.

Having said that, what people are mistaking is the terminology. He will not be a retired pope. Popes cannot retire as we understand retirement. In Canon Law, the original term in Latin means to renounce. The translation into English sounds very negative. The word retire has been inserted. If you read the Code in Latin or in one of the Romance Languages, the term is renounce. Since he renounces the Petrine Ministry, he is no longer a pope of any kind, active or retired.

However, he has never renounced his place in the College of Cardinals. He continues to be a member of the College, even as pope. That’s the whole concept of collegiality.

So, flatly, a man does not abdicate his position in the College of Cardinals when he becomes Pope? A Pope remains a Cardinal (but goes by a different title of course since his ministry is superior to that of a simple cardinal) when he is elected?

The crux of this is whether or not a man who becomes Pope remains a Cardinal. There are no other legal issues here besides that.

 

[JReducation]

So, flatly, a man does not abdicate his position in the College of Cardinals when he becomes Pope? A Pope remains a Cardinal (but goes by a different title of course since his ministry is superior to that of a simple cardinal) when he is elected?

The crux of this is whether or not a man who becomes Pope remains a Cardinal. There are no other legal issues here besides that.

There is nothing in the law or in tradition that says that a pope is no longer a prince of the Church. The papacy is not a step above the cardinals. It’s not as if he’s advancing.

One cannot abdicate the title of cardinal. A cardinal is a prince. One does not abdicate being a prince. One can renounce the rights and privileges that come with being a prince, but one continues to be a prince.

Whereas one can renounce the papacy, when one renounces the Petrine Ministry and the Bishopric of Rome.

This questioned was already answered by the Holy See the day after the Holy Father announced that he was leaving office. The media was asking what would be his status after he abdicates.