Pope names new cardinals, including a former papal nuncio to PHL

  • Thread starter Thread starter BVT
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

BVT

Guest
VATICAN CITY - Pope Benedict XVI said Friday he will create 22 cardinals in February, in a key announcement for the Catholic Church as 18 of them will have the power to elect his successor.

The new cardinals will be formally appointed at a conference known as a consistory to be held in Vatican City on February 18.

The pontiff read out the names of the future cardinals in St. Peter’s Square after a mass to celebrate the Christian festival of Epiphany.

First on the list was Monsignor Fernando Filoni, former Papal Nuncio to the Philippines while last is a leading theologian, Fr. Karl Becker, who is a German Jesuit and professor emeritus of dogmatic theology at the Jesuits’ Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome.

Following the death of a pope, cardinals are called upon to find a successor, usually choosing one of their own. Four of the new cardinals are over 80 years old, and will not therefore be able to vote.

Some of the more powerful cardinals can also help determine whether the Church will develop in a conservative or reformist direction.

Seven of the new cardinals are Italian – increasing the possibility that the next pope could be from Italy, after the German Benedict and the Polish John Paul II.

Others are from India, Canada, the Czech Republic, the Netherlands, the United States, Germany and Hong Kong. Overall, 16 come from Europe, three from North America, one from South America and one from Asia.

There are no cardinals from Oceania or Africa on the list.

news.va/en/news/pope-benedict-calls-consistory-for-feb-18th

Benedict XVI has already held three consistories since the start of his pontificate in 2005. In 2006, 2007 and 2010 he created a total of 62 cardinals, 50 of whom were under 80 years and eligible to vote.

Earlier on Friday, the pope appointed the papal nuncio to Ireland to bishophood in a move to strengthen ties with the Irish Church, hit hard by the clerical sex abuse scandal.

Papal nuncios are the equivalent of ambassadors and serve as diplomatic representatives of the pope in foreign countries.

The pontiff consecrated both the American Charles John Brown and the Polish nuncio to Georgia and Armenia, Marek Solczynski, as bishops.

Brown became papal nuncio to Ireland after his predecessor was recalled in the wake of a government report, which strongly criticized the Vatican for its poor response to the sex scandal.

Brown, 52, worked from 1994 for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the Vatican body in charge of taking measures against clerical abuse.

Solczynski, based in the Georgian capital of Tbilisi, is apostolic nuncio to two of the most ancient Christian countries. — Agence France Presse
 
It wasn’t immediately clear from the OP why this announcement was particularly relevant to Eastern Catholicism, but I see from the linked article (an recall from others) that the appointments included:

His Beatitude GEORGE Alencherry, Major Archbishop of Ernakulam-Angamaly of the Syro Malabar (India)

His Beatitude Lucian Muresan, Major Archbishop of Fagaras and Alba Julia of the Romanians (Romania)

Joyous news indeed for all Catholics, Eastern and Western. The elevation of the Romanian Catholic Church to a Major Achiepiscopal Church in 2005 was also a welcome recognition of a significant sui juris Church in the Catholic communion.

P.S. to Boulder257: With pride as a New Yorker and a Catholic, I’ll confirm that Archbishop Dolan was indeed on the list. All Catholics in NY, and indeed many other Catholics and non-Catholics who know him well, rejoice! Axios! May God grant him many years!
 
tbtcom1213 said:
The Archdiocese of New York is a cardinalatial see; Cardinal Egan turns 80 later this year making him a non voting member of the Sacred College of Cardinals
Click to expand...
You raise an interesting point. Is there such a thing officially as a “cardinalatial see”? It certainly has become customary to elevate leading candidates to large Metropolitan Archdioceses that have typically been led by prelates elevated to the rank of Cardinal (e.g. Cardinal Wuerl, who after transfer from Pittsburgh to Washington, DC was so elevated).

Just curious if this is customary practice or now embedded in the hierarchical structure of the Latin Church.
 
While I appreciate the Pope’s gesture, I think its bad ecclesiology to elevate the heads of Eastern Churches to be part of the Roman Patriarchate’s court.
 
ByzCathCantor said:
You raise an interesting point. Is there such a thing officially as a “cardinalatial see”? It certainly has become customary to elevate leading candidates to large Metropolitan Archdioceses that have typically been led by prelates elevated to the rank of Cardinal (e.g. Cardinal Wuerl, who after transfer from Pittsburgh to Washington, DC was so elevated).

Just curious if this is customary practice or now embedded in the hierarchical structure of the Latin Church.
Click to expand...
It is just a custom. However, customs are easier to start than to end. 😉
 
Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor is turning 80 this year, so I wonder why Archbishop Nichols wasn’t designated. Also, what is up with the recent custom of wanting to make the head of every department in the Curia a cardinal? I’d rather see more cardinals in Asia or Africa.
 
Formosus said:
While I appreciate the Pope’s gesture, I think its bad ecclesiology to elevate the heads of Eastern Churches to be part of the Roman Patriarchate’s court.
Click to expand...
Each Eastern Catholic Cardinal drastically increases the chance of an Eastern Catholic Pope
 
That brings us to this list of eastern Catholic bishops in the Congregation of Oriental Churches, and emeritus, with three electors (red, < 80).

HBE Patriarch Cardinal Antonios Naguib (Coptic) - age 76
HB Patriarch Gregorios III Laham (Melkite)
HB Patriarch Béchara Pierre Raï (Maronite)
HB Patriarch Ignace Youssif III Younan (Syrian)
HB Patriarch Nersès Bédros XIX Tarmouni (Armenian)
HBE Patriarch Cardinal Emmanuel III Delly (Chaldean) - age 84

Churches not ancient enough or inopportune to be Patriarchal.

HBE Major Archbishop Cardinal Lucian Mureşan (Romanian) - age 80
HBE Major Archbishop Cardinal George Alencherry (Syro-Malabar) - age 66
HB Major Archbishop Baselios Cleemis Thottunkal (Syro-Malankar)
HB Major Archbishop Sviatoslav Shevchuk (Ukrainian)

Emeritus:

HBE Patriarch Cardinal Nasrallah Pierre Sfeir (Maronite) - age 91
HBE Major Archbishop Cardinal Lubomyr Husar, M.S.U. (Ukrainian) - age 78
HBE Patriarch ad personum Cardinal Ignace Moussa I Daoud (Syrian) - age 81
 
Dakota_Roberts said:
Each Eastern Catholic Cardinal drastically increases the chance of an Eastern Catholic Pope
Click to expand...
Why should an Eastern Catholic be the bishop of Rome or the Parriarch of the West? The Pope’s first role is to his diocese, then to his patriarchate, then to the Universal Church. A Roman should head the Roman Church (and yes I am aware of historical examples of Greek and Syrian popes).
 
Formosus said:
Why should an Eastern Catholic be the bishop of Rome or the Parriarch of the West? The Pope’s first role is to his diocese, then to his patriarchate, then to the Universal Church. A Roman should head the Roman Church (and yes I am aware of historical examples of Greek and Syrian popes).
Click to expand...
What specifically is wrong with an Eastern Catholic being elected Pope?

What specifically is wrong with an Eastern Catholic being a Prince of the Church?
 
Here are just a few Eastern Popes:

A Patriarch of Antioch, St Peter the Apostle, became the first Pope of Rome. 😉
St Evaristus, born in Judea, became Pope of Rome.
St Telesphorus, born in Greece, became Pope of Rome.
St Hyginus, born in Greece, became Pope of Rome.
St Anicetus, born in Syria, became Pope of Rome.
St Anterus, born in Greece, became Pope of Rome.
St Sixtus II, born in Greece, became Pope of Rome.
St Dionysius, born in Greece, became Pope of Rome.

This list I made starts with St Peter and ends with St Dionysius who died A.D. 268. Eight out of the first 25 were Eastern in origin.
 
Formosus said:
Why should an Eastern Catholic be the bishop of Rome or the Parriarch of the West? The Pope’s first role is to his diocese, then to his patriarchate, then to the Universal Church. A Roman should head the Roman Church (and yes I am aware of historical examples of Greek and Syrian popes).
Click to expand...
***Press release concerning the abolition of the title ******“Patriarch of the West” ***in the Pontifical Yearbook 2006

In The 2006 Pontifical Yearbook the title “Patriarch of the West” is missing from the enumeration of the Pope’s titles. This absence has been commented on in different ways and requires clarification.

Without presuming to consider the complex historical question of the title of patriarch in all its aspects, it can be said from the historical point of view that the ancient patriarchs of the East, established by the Councils of Constantinople (381) and Chalcedon (451), were related to a fairly clearly defined territory, where the territory of the See of the Bishop of Rome remained vague. In the East, under the ecclesiastical imperial system of Justinian (527-565), in addition to the four Eastern Patriarchs (Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem), the Pope was included as the Patriarch of the West. Conversely, Rome favors the idea of the three Petrine episcopal sees: Rome, Alexandria and Antioch. Without using the title “Patriarch of the West,” the Fourth Council of Constantinople (869-70), the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) and the Council of Florence (1439), listed the Pope as the first of the then five Patriarchs.

The title “Patriarch of the West” was used in the year 642 by Pope Theodore I. Thereafter, it only used rarely and did not have a clear meaning. Its heyday came in the sixteenth and seventeenth century, under the multiplication of the Pope’s titles, it appeared in The Pontifical Yearbook for the first time in 1863.

Currently, the meaning of the term “West” refers to a cultural context that refers not only to Western Europe, but extends to the United States of America to Australia, and New Zealand, thus differing from other cultural contexts. Obviously, this meaning of the term “West” does not intend to describe an ecclesiastical territory nor it can be used as a definition of a patriarchal territory. If you want to give to the term ‘West’ a meaning applicable to ecclesiastical juridical language, it could only be understood with reference to the Latin Church. Therefore, the title “Patriarch of the West” would describe the Bishop of Rome’s special relationship with it and could express the particular jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome for the Latin Church.

Consequently, the title “Patriarch of the West” from the outset is unclear, and with the evolution of history became obsolete and practically unusable. All the more so, since the Catholic Church from Vatican II founded for the Latin Church in the form of episcopal conferences and their international meetings of bishops’ conferences, the canons targeted to the needs of today.

Omitting the title of “Patriarch of the West” clearly does not change anything in the recognition, so solemnly declared by Vatican Council II, of the ancient patriarchal Churches (Lumen Gentium 23). Still less can this suppression mean that it implies new demands. The waiver of that title is meant to express a historical and theological realism, and at the same time, be the relinquishment of a claim, a waiver that may be of benefit to ecumenical dialogue.

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/sub-index/index_general-docs.htm
 
Joe_Kelley said:
It is just a custom. However, customs are easier to start than to end. 😉
Click to expand...
In Scotland, the sole Red Hat awarded to our nation since the Reformation seems to have alternated between our two Archepiscopal sees - respectively, it has been held by Cardinal Gray of Edinburgh & St Andrews, then Cardinal Winning of Glasgow, and is now once more in Edinburgh with Cardinal O’Brien. Whether this will continue remains to be seen.
 
TrueLight said:
Is this true?
Click to expand...
No order seems to be specified in the roles that the Pope has. He has the office (munus):

Head of the College of Bishops,
the Vicar (an agent) of Christ, and
the Pastor of the universal Church here on earth
also:
Primate of Italy (head of state of Vatican City)

Dogma, Lumen Gentium 18 (Vatican II):

This Sacred Council, following closely in the footsteps of the First Vatican Council, with that Council teaches and declares that Jesus Christ, the eternal Shepherd, established His holy Church, having sent forth the apostles as He Himself had been sent by the Father;(136) and He willed that their successors, namely the bishops, should be shepherds in His Church even to the consummation of the world. And in order that the episcopate itself might be one and undivided, He placed Blessed Peter over the other apostles, and instituted in him a permanent and visible source and foundation of unity of faith and communion.(1*) And all this teaching about the institution, the perpetuity, the meaning and reason for the sacred primacy of the Roman Pontiff and of his infallible magisterium, this Sacred Council again proposes to be firmly believed by all the faithful. Continuing in that same undertaking, this Council is resolved to declare and proclaim before all men the doctrine concerning bishops, the successors of the apostles, who together with the successor of Peter, the Vicar of Christ,(2*) the visible Head of the whole Church, govern the house of the living God.

(1) Cfr. Conc. Vat. I, Sess. IV, Const. Dogm.* Pastor aeternus*. Denz. 1821 (3050 s.).
(2) Cfr. Conc. Flor., Decretum pro Graecis: Denz. 694 (1307) et Conc. Vat. I, ib.: Denz. 1826 (3059)

Canon Law

CCEO Canon 43 The bishop of the Church of Rome, in whom resides the office (munus) given in special way by the Lord to Peter, first of the Apostles and to be transmitted to his successors, is head of the college of bishops, the Vicar of Christ and Pastor of the entire Church on earth; therefore, in virtue of his office (munus) he enjoys supreme, full, immediate and universal ordinary power in the Church which he can always freely exercise.

CIC 331 The office uniquely committed by the Lord to Peter, the first of the Apostles, and to be transmitted to his successors, abides in the Bishop of the Church of Rome. He is the head of the College of Bishops, the Vicar of Christ, and the Pastor of the universal Church here on earth. Consequently, by virtue of his office, he has supreme, full, immediate and universal ordinary power in the Church, and he can always freely exercise this power.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top