The Bishop's Weekly Column from the Parish Bulletin

OUR LADY OF FATIMA

CATHOLIC CHURCH

It's an elective monarchy
and not a tyranny either !

October 9th, 2009

Dumping the Piero Pallium at the feet of a Pope who quit

I can remember those warm summer afternoons as though they were yesterday, those lazy summer hours spent studying Fundamental Theology, the treatises: de fontibus Revelationis, de membris Ecclesiae, de Constitutione Ecclesiae - the latter one is the subject of this column.

In the middle of class the professor stopped his lecture and asked what kind of bird was singing outside. Now if Fr. Z. were there he would have known instantly I'm sure, but he wasn't. One seminarian piped: "A whippoorwill, Father." "No it's a Cardinal." came the terse reply. Then by way of explanation: "The male Cardinal has an afternoon call and a morning call." We were informed. Once, a couple of years ago, whilst on an afternoon Rosary walk with Sister Mary Michaela at the park I heard the same call and told her that story. We weren't disappointed either - we were finally able to locate the little fellow hiding in a Pine tree. Yes Catholic Apologetics, even bird calls have their use from time to time.

Well it might have been in that same context that the bird call took place since it is jogged in my memory when I think of the surprising statement that serves as a title to this column. One day the professor told us that the Papacy was not a democracy, but an elective monarchy. The Pope is elected by the Cardinals and upon acceptance of their election, he immediately becomes a monarch (which accounts for the use of the Tiara which some Trads want to see restored). After the Marinification of papal liturgies under the Piero of that name, the restoration under the Guido of that name is starting to look a little ridiculous. Papal thrones up flights of stairs with no canopy really don't connect with me. It all harps back to a by-gone age - the revival of externals without the revival of doctrine seems absolutely meaningless to me.

That being said, though, Peter is still Peter, and as Vatican I clearly taught he has the primacy of jurisdiction in matters of Faith, morals and discipline. Faith and morals are not the issue... discipline is... particularly where the pastoral governance of the Church universal is concerned. However, even here there are well-defined limits. Take, for example, the story of St. Bruno (October 6 in the Trad calendar) who wanted to live a life of monastic seclusion, he was summoned to Rome by Pope Urban II to act as an advisor. This caused the Saint no amount of anguish, however, he received permission to return to seclusion at length but not before refusing the Archbishopric of Reggio. You see, even here, Popes cannot coerce a person where a matter of free-will is concerned. Indeed the lives of the Saints are replete with similar examples.

Earlier this year, Pope Benedict XVI paid a visit to the shrine of St. Peter Celestine at L'Aquila where an earthquake had occurred some weeks earlier. There he left a Pallium at the shrine (it was in fact the one designed by Piero - what a wonderful way to get rid of it and make sure it would never be seen again!) It is helpful to recall that St. Peter Celestine was in point of fact one of the few Popes to have resigned his office. Having been elected against his will, he had accepted, but, 5 months into his pontificate, more than aware of his shortcomings and how he was hopelessly out of his depth as the Universal Pastor, he decreed a Pope can resign, and then resigned. Two traditions have developed as to what happened next - one says he went into seclusion as a hermit until his death, the other admits the seclusion but insists the seclusion was not voluntary, rather he was imprisoned by his successor. Well even Peter can change heart and I hope you know by now how that is a good thing.

+TF