Can a Eastern Catholic cardinal become Pope?

[Digitnomy]

If the person elected is not a Bishop, the announcement of his election is only to be made after his ordination. So would he be ordained immediately in the conclave (assuming he is a Cardinal)? What if he wasn’t even a Cardinal, say a priest or deacon who is away, is he immediately summoned to the Vatican? How is the announcement postponed in that scenario?

Former US Ambassador to the Holy See Raymond Flynn wrote a novel, “The Accidental Pope,” which touched on this idea.

Condensed plot: After repeated deadlocks in the vote, an American cardinal says “I wonder what my wise old fisherman/buddy/priest would have done in this situation…” Amazingly a chunk of the votes go to the priest. Another vote or two and the priest seems like a real contender.

The conclave suspends voting for a couple days (I think there’s a term for this but I haven’t read up on conclaves in awhile), while the cardinal goes back to America to summon the priest in secrecy. He comes to Rome on a separate flight to avoid the media. The cardinal names him a monsignor to make his candidacy slightly more realistic, even though he had left the priesthood, married, was still raising a family, and was now a widower.

He then appears before the conclave and answers some of their questions. And before long, white smoke!

The rest of the book is about this unlikely pope and how he and his family fit into the role, and the course of his papacy.

Pretty unrealistic on a lot of levels, and there was also some sloppiness with facts. But I suspect the main plot is a good guess at how that might happen, probably informed by chats with various cardinals and Vatican experts.

 

[poche]

Cardinal Slipj was an eastern rite Catholic.

 

[dochawk]

So that while held in higher regard these days, they still have not yet been admitted into the ranks of the Cardinals… And I could be wrong - Wrong would be joy…

The trending EC thinking is that EC prelates should not be cardinals, as it is an inherently internal position to the RCC. In recent years, some new occupants of sees that traditionally come with the red cap have turned it down.

 

[TomH1]

Is this possible?

Yes, Eastern Catholics are fully Catholic and can be elected to the papacy. Whilst it is highly unlikely the College of Cardinals would ever elect someone not of their number as pope it is possible. It is long-standing practice that the pope is elected from among the cardinals. It is not mandatory.

If yes, would we have a Pope celebrating only in the Byzantine Rite?

It is important to remember what the pope is. He is the bishop of Rome. That is a Latin Catholic diocese. Also, as well as being the supreme pontiff of the entire Catholic Church the pope is the patriarch of the Latin Catholic Church. Therefore, any pope is going to celebrate Mass, and other liturgies, according to the Roman Rite more than any other. Of course, while other clergy require permission to be bi-ritual, the pope can celebrate the Eucharist in any Catholic rite.

Would he wear a Eastern style white cassock?

That would be a personal choice the individual would make. There is no rule and if there was the pope could change it. This is only a guess but I would anticipate that he would acknowledge to what he had been elected - the See of Rome - and dress accordingly, i.e. as the popes do in the current era.

 

[Vico]

Is this possible? If yes, would we have a Pope celebrating only in the Byzantine Rite? Would he wear a Eastern style white cassock?

The earliest Roman Mass per Justin Martyr (2nd-cen.), was of Eastern type. These were Greek and Syrian Popes from the first two centuries:

St Anacletus was the first Greek Pope.
St Telesphorus was the second.
St Hyginus the third.
St Eleutherius the fourth Greek Pope.
St Anicetus was from Syria.

The Armenian Catholic Cardinal Gregorio Pietro Agagianian was twice considered a serious papal candidate in the years 1958 and 1963.

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

I don’t think Pope would necessarily change rites- he would lead Latin Rite but same way some Latin Bishops take care of Eastern Catholic faithful, he would be able to lead Latin Rite while not being strictly part of it.

If yes, would we have a Pope celebrating only in the Byzantine Rite?

Every and any Pope can celebrate in any and every Rite. My guess is that Pope would celebrate in Latin Rite while celebrating for Latin Catholics in Rome, but would also celebrate in Eastern Rite(s) whenever he would visit Eastern Catholics.

Would he wear a Eastern style white cassock?

Probably preference. Could also change Papal vestments to be Eastern in theory but I think any Eastern Pope would just try to comply with Latin vestments and therefore also cassock…

In Catholicism, there is no single rule which binds the Pope except dogmas and Tradition (capital T). Anything which is disciplinary is not binding for the Pope- Pope could be married man in theory. Practice usually differs as Popes generally understand why and how are rules good, but theoretically they don’t need to follow them.

 

[TomH1]

In Catholicism, there is no single rule which binds the Pope except dogmas and Tradition (capital T). Anything which is disciplinary is not binding for the Pope- Pope could be married man in theory. Practice usually differs as Popes generally understand why and how are rules good, but theoretically they don’t need to follow them

I know this i going off at a slight tangent but … Is it merely disciplinary that bishops (and the pope is a bishop) must not be married or is it doctrine? For example, he in England the Ordinary of the Ordinariate is a priest not a bishop because he is married. If it is disciplinary it would be possible to allow ordinaries of personal ordinariates to be bishops as I believe that would fit in in with their Anglican Patrimony. So, I would like to know if non-married bishops is simply a matter of discipline or if it is doctrine.

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

I know this i going off at a slight tangent but … Is it merely disciplinary that bishops (and the pope is a bishop) must not be married or is it doctrine?

Disciplinary. However, continence is a loong discipline dating to Apostles- while Early Bishops were married, certain time prior to celebrating Eucharist they were excepted to abstain from sexual relations, and at the same time most of them stopped sexual relations upon ordination to Priesthood and lived with their wives as with sister.

If it is disciplinary it would be possible to allow ordinaries of personal ordinariates to be bishops as I believe that would fit in in with their Anglican Patrimony.

Yes, it is possible- however, main and probably only reason that Anglican Ordinariate is not Sui Iuris Church (like Eastern Catholic Churches are) but is actually under Latin Church, is that Holy See does not want to let them have married Bishops- if they did become Sui Iuris Church, they would be able to change this rule even without consent of Holy See (though if Rome opposed I guess it could be stopped, but would probably result in some fractions).

After all, technically married man might be elected Pope. Technically, Pope can marry (there is no law against that) if he never promised to be celibate, or release himself from such promise if he did. Practically, chances are almost 0 and Pope who would abuse his power just to get married would probably not fare well in eternity either…

 

[dochawk]

Is it merely disciplinary that bishops (and the pope is a bishop) must not be married or is it doctrine?

Yes.

Full stop.

However, this dates to the second century, both east and west. There was a problem with bishops’ children inheriting church property.

 

[poche]

Non married bishops is a discipline of long standing.

 

[tafan2]

Disciplines can have a theological reasoning behind them also. It seems like people, more often than not, assume these disciplines could be discarded with no affectt to the Church.