THE CONCHO PADRE POST

Vatican City, 9 March 2013 (VIS) – “The first order of business of the eighth General Congregation, which met yesterday evening and in which 145 cardinals participated, was to vote on the date to begin the Conclave. Cardinal Dean Angelo Sodano, expressing the wishes of all and after having consulted with the Cardinal Carmelengo Tarcisio Bertone, S.D.B., regarding the preparations at the Domus Sanctae Marthae, proposed the date of Tuesday, 12 March. The overwhelming majority immediately voted in agreement,” reported Fr. Federico Lombardi, director of the Holy See Press Office. “There was no difference of opinion between the cardinals and the percentage of votes in favour of to those against was around 10 to one. Moreover,” Fr. Lombardi added, “the full complement of Cardinal electors was already reached and it was no longer considered necessary to wait further, as they already had time to reflect on their decision.”

Fifteen cardinals intervened during the course of the Congregation and two newly arrived cardinals were sworn in, neither of which is a Cardinal elector: Cardinal Miguel Obando Bravo, S.D.B., archbishop emeritus of Managua, Nicaragua, and Cardinal Gaudencio Borbon Rosales, archbishop emeritus of Manila, Philippines.

During the ninth General Congregation that met this morning, the cardinals spoke about moving into the Domus Sanctae Marthae, which will be their residence for the duration of the Conclave. “It was agreed by majority that the move will take place on Tuesday morning, beginning from 7:00am, that is, the same day that the Conclave begins. A “Pro eligendo Romano Pontifice” Mass will be celebrated by the Cardinal Dean at 10:00am that morning in St. Peter’s Square. Rooms were also assigned, by lot.”

“This morning 17 cardinals intervened, speaking on the same general themes that have been previously reported, including: expectations regarding the new Pope, activities of the Holy See and its Dicasteries, and improving the Curia. In total, there have been 133 interventions in the General Congregations and, keeping in mind those scheduled for Monday, that number will probably reach 150.”

At the end of the press conference, the schedule for the sessions of the Conclave was presented. On Tuesday at 3:45pm, the cardinals will move from the Domus Sanctae Marthae to the Pauline Chapel in the Apostolic Palace. At 4:30pm, the cardinals will process from the Pauline Chapel to the Sistine Chapel and, after they have all taken the oath, the Master of Papal Liturgical Celebrations will give the order “Extra omnes” for all those not taking part in the Conclave to leave the Sistine Chapel. The cardinals will listen to a meditation given by Cardinal Grech, concerning the grave duty incumbent on them and thus on the need to act with right intention for the good of the Universal Church, after which they will proceed to the first vote. At 7:00pm they will pray Vespers and, at 7:30pm, will return to the Domus Sanctae Marthae.

Beginning on Wednesday, 13 March, the cardinals will move from the Domus Sanctae Marthae to the Pauline Chapel at 7:45am where, at 8:15am, they will celebrate Mass. At 9:30am they will enter the Sistine Chapel, pray the Liturgy of the Hours, and proceed to the voting process. Around 12:00pm they will return to the Domus Sanctae Marthae and, after lunch there, will go back to the Sistine Chapel at 4:00pm where they will pray briefly and resume the voting procedure until 7:00pm.

This coming Monday, 11 March, all the auxiliary personnel needed to ensure the smooth operations of the Conclave will take the oath of secrecy and those images will be broadcast by Vatican Television.

Since there are two votes each morning and afternoon, Fr. Lombardi stated that the ‘fumata’ (smoke signalling the election or non-election of a pontiff) that is produced from the burning of the ballots from those two voting processes could be expected around 12:00pm, in the case of the morning, or 7:00pm, in the case of the evening, unless the first of the two votes produces an election. In such an instance, the “fumata” would obviously take place earlier.

The Director of the Holy See Press Office also recalled the procedure in the case that a pontiff is not elected in the first four days of voting. In such an instance the cardinals will take a pause on the fifth day in order to pray, speak freely among themselves, and listen to a brief exhortation given by the senior cardinal in the Order of Deacons. The scrutinies will proceed in a similar fashion—two days of voting with every third day taken to pause for prayer—until the 34th vote on the afternoon of the eleventh day. In such an event, No. 75 of the Apostolic Constitution “Universi Dominici Gregis” modified by Benedict XVI’s recent “Motu Proprio” would apply, which states: “If the balloting mentioned in Nos. 72, 73, and 74 of the aforementioned Constitution does not result in an election, one day shall be dedicated to prayer, reflection and dialogue; in the successive balloting, observing the order established in No. 74 of the same Constitution, only the two names which received the greatest number of votes in the previous scrutiny, will have passive voice. There can be no waiving of the requirement that, in these ballots too, for a valid election to take place there must be a clear majority of at least two thirds of the votes of the Cardinals present and voting. In these ballots the two names having passive voice do not have active voice.” That is, the two candidates with the greatest number of votes will be voted for and cannot themselves cast a vote.

Fr. Lombardi reported that the commission that, under the direction of the Camerlengo, is responsible for sealing the entrances to the areas of the Conclave and carrying out the other operations necessary for the safeguarding of the Conclave was established. It is led by the Cardinal Camerlengo and among its members are the Substitute of the Secretariat of State, the Commandant of the Swiss Guards, members of the Gendarmerie, and notaries.

Finally he reported that the Pope’s Fisherman’s Ring—which exists in two forms, the ring itself and as a stamp used to seal documents—as well as two stamps—a larger and a smaller one—and the master lead seal of the pontificate were all destroyed, the images scratched out in the form of a cross to render them useless. The next Pope’s ring will bear the same image of Peter casting his net but, naturally, will have the new pontiff’s name inscribed above the image.

It was also communicated that tomorrow, Sunday, 10 March, various cardinals will celebrate Mass at their titular churches, inviting the faithful to pray for the Church and for the election of the new pontiff.

Vatican Information Service

Rejoicing
in this annual celebration
of our Lenten observance,
we pray, O Lord, that,
with our hearts set on the paschal mysteries,
we may be gladdened by their full effects.
Through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son,
who lives and reigns with you in the unity of the Holy Spirit,
one God, for ever and ever.
– Amen.

The Roman Missal

by Phil Lawler
catholicculture.org
March 7, 2013

Something historic is happening in Rome this week. Not only preparations for the election of a new Roman Pontiff—although that would be historic in itself—but the clash between two incompatible visions of how the Catholic Church should present herself to the world.

Yesterday the American cardinals abruptly suspended the press briefings they had been organizing every day during the sede vacante period, apparently under pressure from other prelates. The director of the Vatican press office, Father Federico Lombardi, seemed more comfortable, now that the competition to his own daily briefings had been eliminated. He explained that while the cardinals were meeting for confidential discussions, it was important for all the participants to be sure that their talks would not leak into the public domain. More candid officials (and it is not difficult to find officials more candid than the Vatican’s chief spokesman) revealed that the American cardinals were shutting down their media operation because of a backlash caused by leaks to the Italian press.

There had indeed been some serious leaks. The Italian daily La Stampa, in particular, had printed detailed accounts of the “confidential” talks in the cardinals’ congregations. But these leaks had nothing to do with the American prelates’ daily briefings.

Think about it. A “leak” is, by nature, a surreptitious release of information. The American cardinals were doing nothing at all surreptitious; they were speaking in plain sight, with cameras and tape recorders rolling. If their briefings had been the source of indiscreet reports on the meetings in the Synod Hall, the whole world would have known it—and would have known exactly who broke the seal of secrecy.

There are, regrettably, always leaks from secret Vatican meetings. At a papal election, every cardinal solemnly vows that he will never disclose what happened during the conclave. Yet within a few weeks after each conclave, journalists have a fairly accurate understanding of what happened. Sad to say, some cardinals cannot keep their mouths shut, even when they have sworn to do so. Or perhaps the blame can be pinned on the few aides, translators, and technicians who have access to information from these secret sessions. In any case the leaks are completely illicit, and should not be compared with the above-board sessions arranged by the American hierarchy. Imposing a blackout on legitimate news briefings will not eliminate the illegitimate.

Yesterday scores of newspaper headlines announced that the Vatican had silenced the American bishops. Who or what is “the Vatican” in this context? The Vatican is a little city-state, ruled by the Pope. But at the moment there is no Pope. The Holy See is vacant, and since the prelates who hold high offices in the Roman Curia serve only to carry out the policies set by the Roman Pontiff, they currently have no authority. During the sede vacante period the Vatican is led by the College of Cardinals, acting in concert. There is no higher authority within the Church that could impose a gag order on the American cardinals. Evidently, then, the Americans acceded to a wish expressed by other cardinals, to avoid upsetting the serenity of the congregations. Yet they did so reluctantly. Sister Mary Ann Walsh, who is (or should I say had been?) handling press relations for the American hierarchy, said bluntly: “The US cardinals are committed to transparency.”

Not all of the world’s cardinals share that commitment, apparently. The American cardinals did not want to violate the confidentiality of their colleagues, but they did want an open discussion of the challenges that face the universal Church. They wanted to air their own ideas, allowing others to comment, stimulating public discussion. They wanted their colleagues to know—wanted the world to know—what they were thinking, so that everyone would be more informed as the conclave opened. If the American cardinals had been politicking during their daily briefings, they would have deserved a public rebuke. But they had not been lobbying for votes; they had been answering questions from reporters, and raising questions for other Church leaders to address.

Every cardinal in Rome is doing the same thing: raising questions, answering questions–as a way of gaining information about the papabili and sharing opinions about the priorities of the next pontificate. Only the Americans were doing this openly, with reporters present to record their remarks. Other cardinals were going about the same business quietly, in pairs or small groups, over coffee or dinner. If an American cardinal said something imprudent during the briefings at the North American College, he was fully accountable. If other cardinals made untoward comments during their private sessions—gave inaccurate information, say, or canvassed for votes—the world would never know. Sunshine is a wonderful disinfectant, as the old saying goes. When cardinals are speaking before a battery of microphones, they are not whispering over drinks.

Some cardinals—perhaps many cardinals—evidently thought that by catering to reporters, the American cardinals were increasing the influence of the press and the likelihood of unfavorable media coverage. That attitude is profoundly misguided. The American prelates’ briefings had been the best source of solid information for the hundreds of reporters covering the cardinals’ meetings. (The “official” briefings by the Vatican press office offer only the most cautious, circumspect, and general hints about what the cardinals have been saying, combined with detailed information on the esoteric aspects of the papal election: the ceremonial urns one day, the cardinals’ residence the next.) Without access to that source of solid information, reporters searching for stories will now have more incentive to hunt down rumors, innuendos, scandals…yes, and leaks.

Even the blackout itself produced negative headlines for the Church. As John Allen of the National Catholic Reporter pointed out, Cardinal Timothy Dolan had been scheduled to address reporters. Inevitably the gregarious prelate from New York would have captivated reporters with his homespun expressions and one-liners, along with some pointed insights. Instead reporters were left with a story about a Vatican crackdown on prelates who break with the ingrown culture of ecclesiastical omerta.

Again, who are these influential Vatican figures who seem able to impose their will on the College of Cardinals? We do not know their names (although we may have suspicions) because they act behind closed doors, and do not take public responsibility for their decisions. But we do know that the Old Guard at the Vatican cherishes a certain distinctive approach to Church governance: an impersonal, top-down approach, in which officials make decisions without offering explanations, and dispense information strictly on a need-to-know basis.

Like any entrenched bureaucracy, the Old Guard at the Vatican protects its own position. So the Old Guard does not want the College of Cardinals to press for more information about the recent embarrassments of the Roman Curia, most conspicuously the “Vatileaks” scandal. Since the Old Guard is the best-organized bloc among the cardinals, its members do not want to allow time for other blocs to form; thus the Old Guard pressed for a quick conclave, in which the cardinals would choose a new Pontiff without pausing to ask inconvenient questions or consider unwanted possibilities.

Although the US cardinals agreed reluctantly to cease their daily briefings, it is significant that the College of Cardinals has not acceded to the pressure for a quick conclave. The Old Guard has apparently lost that contest, in what could be a preview of a fascinating papal conclave.

In the months leading up to the Second Vatican Council, the Old Guard then ensconced in the Roman Curia prepared a series of carefully worded documents for the Council’s approval. To their surprise and dismay, the Council fathers rejected those drafts, demanding more visionary statements. The Old Guard wanted to continue with business as usual; the leaders of the universal Church chose otherwise. Could something similar be happening in Rome this week? Could the cardinals be on the verge of rejecting the old approach and demanding accountability of Church officials?

In 2005, when the world’s cardinals entered the conclave to choose a successor to Blessed John Paul II, there was one question clearly uppermost in their minds: whether or not Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger should be elected. Next week—or whenever the conclave begins—I believe there will again be a single question at the top of the cardinals’ agenda: whether or not the Church will opt for transparency and accountability.

The blackout of the American cardinals has only heightened the tensions between two competing visions of the Church, and ironically enhanced the influence of the American hierarchy. This is not a matter of liberals vs. conservatives, or progressive vs. traditionalists, or First World vs. Third World, or centralization vs. decentralization. It is a conflict between those who see ecclesiastical power as an entitlement and those who recognize it as a responsibility—between those whose model for Vatican administration resembles the court of a 17th-century monarch and those who believe that anyone working in the Roman Curia is merely a servant of the Pope, who himself is the Servant of the Servants of God.

For more news and commentary, see catholicculture.org

From the Vatican Press Office

The eighth General Congregation of the College of Cardinals has decided that the Conclave for the election of the Pope will begin on Tuesday, 12 March 2013.
A “pro eligendo Romano Pontifice” Mass will be celebrated in St. Peter’s Basilica in the morning. In the afternoon the cardinals will enter into the Conclave.

Gospel Mk 12:28-34

One of the scribes came to Jesus and asked him,
“Which is the first of all the commandments?”
Jesus replied, “The first is this:
Hear, O Israel!
The Lord our God is Lord alone!
You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart,
with all your soul,
with all your mind,
and with all your strength.
The second is this:
You shall love your neighbor as yourself.
There is no other commandment greater than these.”
The scribe said to him, “Well said, teacher.
You are right in saying,
He is One and there is no other than he.
And to love him with all your heart,
with all your understanding,
with all your strength,
and to love your neighbor as yourself
is worth more than all burnt offerings and sacrifices.”
And when Jesus saw that he answered with understanding,
he said to him,
“You are not far from the Kingdom of God.”
And no one dared to ask him any more questions.

The Roman Lectionary