Scenario of non-cardinal being elected Pope

[Evan]

A Jesuit could become Pope, I know that priests from various orders have become Pope. For example: the pope wears which because that is the color Dominicans wear and the first Pope to wear white was a Dominican.

 

[Stylites]

It would seem that such a likely candidate would at least need to be ordained a priest, then (after election) consecrated bishop (of Rome).

Highly unlikely, though not impossible.

As I understand it, there is no formal requirement that an elected Pope must be a priest, or even a Catholic for that matter, and in both cases the requirement would then be for immediate conversion and ordination.

 

[PacoG]

Another example would be when a few votes had been allegedly cast for Archbishop Lefevre (this was before his excommunication) within the August conclave of 1978. I would be grateful for insights on this issue.

I have read several books about the conclaves of 1978 and have never seen anything about Lefevre getting any votes. Please cite your source.

Furthermore, no cardinal would have wasted their vote on Lefevre when there was a viable conservative like Siri in the mix.

 

[Young_Thinker]

I have read several books about the conclaves of 1978 and have never seen anything about Lefevre getting any votes. Please cite your source.

Here is what I found on Wikipedia:

David Allen White’s biography of Lefebvre, The Horn of the Unicorn, reports that Lefebvre allegedly received a small number of votes (variously reported as three or “several”) in the August 1978 conclave that elected Pope John Paul I. This was said to have caused some consternation among the cardinals as Lefebvre was not a cardinal, and casting a vote for a non-cardinal in a papal election is unusual, although permitted by Church law.

 

[Matthew_Holford]

As I understand it, there is no formal requirement that an elected Pope must be a priest, or even a Catholic for that matter, and in both cases the requirement would then be for immediate conversion and ordination.

I believe the candidate must be male (obviously), baptised, and an member of any of the 23 Catholic churches sui iuris.

I know that a lay man would not have to be ordained a deacon. However, the man elected to the Papacy must first be ordained as a priest and then a bishop.

 

[Young_Thinker]

I know that a lay man would not have to be ordained a deacon. However, the man elected to the Papacy must first be ordained as a priest and then a bishop.

Why would not he have to be made a deacon before being ordained a priest?

 

[Matthew_Holford]

Here is what I found on Wikipedia:

Any talk of who got how many votes in any conclave can really only be hearsay. Finding reliable sources would be next to impossible. Releasing information about a conclave is punishable by excommunication.

 

[Matthew_Holford]

Why would not he have to be made a deacon before being ordained a priest?

As I have said in at least one other post I am relying on memory (which is fallible) thus I cannot easily answer your question. There are, I am sure, other members of CAF who could explain why ordination to the diaconate would not be necessary but why sacerdotal ordination is required.

 

[Young_Thinker]

As I have said in at least one other post I am relying on memory (which is fallible) thus I cannot easily answer your question. There are, I am sure, other members of CAF who could explain why ordination to the diaconate would not be necessary but why sacerdotal ordination is required.

All right. I appreciate your honesty.

 

[Young_Thinker]

Any talk of who got how many votes in any conclave can really only be hearsay. Finding reliable sources would be next to impossible. Releasing information about a conclave is punishable by excommunication.

Indeed, Mr. Holford. That is why unless a man were elected, it could not be certain as to whether he had received any votes. So, I was stating an allegation, and Paco asked for a source.

 

[Matthew_Holford]

Indeed, Mr. Holford. That is why unless a man were elected, it could not be certain as to whether he had received any votes. So, I was stating an allegation, and Paco asked for a source.

I was responding to the general concept of publications purporting to claim how many votes particular cardinals polled in specific conclaves. It may have been better if I’d posted a reply rather than quoted your actual post.

 

[Young_Thinker]

I was responding to the general concept of publications purporting to claim how many votes particular cardinals polled in specific conclaves. It may have been better if I’d posted a reply rather than quoted your actual post.

I understand.

 

[Skeptic92]

Greetings, everyone. I was wondering if anyone knew what the procedures would be if a non-cardinal were to be elected to the Papacy. I realize that this has not happened for the past 600 years, but I was curious as to how the Sacred College would perform this action. For instance, if the electee is not part of the Conclave (which would be the case for one who is not a cardinal), how would he know that he has been chosen or had even been considered? In addition, would such a man, for reasons of practicality, need to be Rome at the time of the Conclave? I read that after the death of Paul IV in 1559, Fr. Diego Laynez, the second Superior-General of the Society of Jesus, fled after learning that he was being seriously considered for St. Peter’s Chair. If he had remained within the vicinity and were elected Pontiff, could he have accepted the position, given that he was a Jesuit? Another example would be when a few votes had been allegedly cast for Archbishop Lefevre (this was before his excommunication) within the August conclave of 1978. I would be grateful for insights on this issue.

If a non-cardinal (or even a layman, it’s possible, one example is Pope John XIX) is elected to the papacy, the Cardinal Dean of the College of Cardinals, Ordains and consecrates the new Bishop of Rome (according to Canon 239 Paragraph 2), the last time this had to happen was Pope St Peter Celestine V, who was a Benedictine Monk.

 

[Stylites]

I believe the candidate must be male (obviously), baptised, and an member of any of the 23 Catholic churches sui iuris.

I know that a lay man would not have to be ordained a deacon. However, the man elected to the Papacy must first be ordained as a priest and then a bishop.

Yes, male is the formal requirement. A non-baptised non-Catholic, though, could be elected.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

I know that a lay man would not have to be ordained a deacon. However, the man elected to the Papacy must first be ordained as a priest and then a bishop.

I do not believe this is true. One must be a deacon to be ordained a priest.

So a lay man would be ordained deacon, then priest, then bishop. No skipping of orders.

If they could skip orders then why not just ordain directly to the episcopate because it is the fullness of the priesthood.

 

[Digitonomy]

I do not believe this is true. One must be a deacon to be ordained a priest.

So a lay man would be ordained deacon, then priest, then bishop. No skipping of orders.

There is precedent for such skipping, in the Apostles.

 

[The_Old_Medic]

ByzCath, if you go to the link listed above, and read the actual rules for the election of a Pope, you will discover that one is NOT ordained a Deacon, then Priest, then Bishop, etc. One must be ordained first a Priest (they skip the Deacon level), and is immediately ordained a Bishop. All Bishop’s must be Priests first, but you do not HAVE to become a Deacon in order to become a Priest, in that one exceptional case.

It even specifies what the procedure is, if the elected candidate is not in Rome at the time of the election. It is all spelled out, by Pope John Paul II, and the procedure has NOT been changed since his death. Each Pope has the right to change it, but not all of them do.

It also emphasizes absolute and total secrecy, upon pain of excommunication, of the electoral process involved. So, all of the rumors that you hear about votes taken, who candidates were, etc. are just that, rumors. The ONLY thing known for certain is how many times no candidate was elected, because of the smoke from the fire burning the ballots…

 

[TheMc]

ByzCath, if you go to the link listed above, and read the actual rules for the election of a Pope, you will discover that one is NOT ordained a Deacon, then Priest, then Bishop, etc. One must be ordained first a Priest (they skip the Deacon level), and is immediately ordained a Bishop. All Bishop’s must be Priests first, but you do not HAVE to become a Deacon in order to become a Priest, in that one exceptional case.

What paragraph is this from? Can you cite your source?

Here’s the link again, for everyone.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

There is precedent for such skipping, in the Apostles.

The diaconate and priesthood were not “skipped” with the Apostles. Those offices did not exist at the time.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

ByzCath, if you go to the link listed above, and read the actual rules for the election of a Pope, you will discover that one is NOT ordained a Deacon, then Priest, then Bishop, etc. One must be ordained first a Priest (they skip the Deacon level), and is immediately ordained a Bishop. All Bishop’s must be Priests first, but you do not HAVE to become a Deacon in order to become a Priest, in that one exceptional case.

It even specifies what the procedure is, if the elected candidate is not in Rome at the time of the election. It is all spelled out, by Pope John Paul II, and the procedure has NOT been changed since his death. Each Pope has the right to change it, but not all of them do.

It also emphasizes absolute and total secrecy, upon pain of excommunication, of the electoral process involved. So, all of the rumors that you hear about votes taken, who candidates were, etc. are just that, rumors. The ONLY thing known for certain is how many times no candidate was elected, because of the smoke from the fire burning the ballots…

What paragraph is this from? Can you cite your source?

Here’s the link again, for everyone.

Yes please cite the source as I (admittedly) did a quick scan and can only find where it says that if one is not a bishop that they “shall immediately be ordained Bishop” which is in paragraph 88. I see nothing about ordination to the priesthood, so maybe they are saying what I said, if skipping the diaconate then also skip the priesthood and go right to bishop.