There is a key difference between JPII/BXVI and Francis. JPII/BXVI were well known for appointing bishops and cardinals who differed from them in their vision for the Church. Francis has been much more ideological in his selections - he very rarely appoints a cardinal who doesn't toe his line. Even ABp Gomez, who heads the largest see in the United States and has historically been led by a cardinal, is seen as insufficiently aligned with Francis.
I'm not claiming that will be determinative of the outcome of the next conclave, but it's an important thing to keep in mind when making comparisons between them and using that historical context to suggest the next conclave will be as unpredictable.
This report tickled my funny bone. The body is not cold but the vultures are gathering. There is no politics in the church- really? I could sell you a bridge in Brooklyn.
What I just find amazing is Paul VI set an age for both retirement of bishops and an age limit for Cardinal electors.
Is there a special Ordination given to bishops of Rome that I’m unaware of? It must give special graces so that age doesn’t matter.
If a bishop has to turn in his resignation at 75 and he only heads a local Church how much more appropriate would it be for the “universal bishop” to do the same.
Also, Cardinals can’t vote after 80 but recent popes reign longer than that.
What I just find amazing is Paul VI set an age for both retirement of bishops and an age limit for Cardinal electors.
Is there a special Ordination given to bishops of Rome that I’m unaware of? It must give special graces so that age doesn’t matter.
If a bishop has to turn in his resignation at 75 and he only heads a local Church how much more appropriate would it be for the “universal bishop” to do the same.
Also, Cardinals can’t vote after 80 but recent popes reign longer than that.
It's really interesting to read about the college of cardinals from before the expansion and the retirement age. The entire college (and remember, there was no aging out of the role) was capped at 70 until the papacy of John XXIII. And before the general retirement age for bishops you'd see stuff like John Glennon, serving Archbishop of St Louis, being created Cardinal at 83, or Carlos de la Torre of Quito, created cardinal at 79 and continuing to serve as archbishop for another 14 years. Maybe the only comparable career since the retirement age was instituted is that of Kasimir Swiatek, one of those great bishops from behind the iron curtain who was created Cardinal by JPII at 80 and remained a diocesan administrator until a month before his death at 96.
Also the lack of correspondence between bishop retirement age and cardinal retirement age has caused problems. Gomez and Chaput were not named cardinals by Benedict because their predecessors were still under 80 and it would have been seen as an unfair boost to Philadelphia and L.A. to give them two voting cardinals. Then Francis came in with a new attitude toward cardinal-making and they never became cardinals at all.
There is a key difference between JPII/BXVI and Francis. JPII/BXVI were well known for appointing bishops and cardinals who differed from them in their vision for the Church. Francis has been much more ideological in his selections - he very rarely appoints a cardinal who doesn't toe his line. Even ABp Gomez, who heads the largest see in the United States and has historically been led by a cardinal, is seen as insufficiently aligned with Francis.
I'm not claiming that will be determinative of the outcome of the next conclave, but it's an important thing to keep in mind when making comparisons between them and using that historical context to suggest the next conclave will be as unpredictable.
This report tickled my funny bone. The body is not cold but the vultures are gathering. There is no politics in the church- really? I could sell you a bridge in Brooklyn.
Politics in the Church began with the Apostles. Who. ranks higher,? Who gets a better seat in the Kingdom?
This is nothing new.
Totally agree. Many so not agree. Consider Jesus response to the jockeying for position.
What I just find amazing is Paul VI set an age for both retirement of bishops and an age limit for Cardinal electors.
Is there a special Ordination given to bishops of Rome that I’m unaware of? It must give special graces so that age doesn’t matter.
If a bishop has to turn in his resignation at 75 and he only heads a local Church how much more appropriate would it be for the “universal bishop” to do the same.
Also, Cardinals can’t vote after 80 but recent popes reign longer than that.
Ah, the inconsistencies of papal power.
What I just find amazing is Paul VI set an age for both retirement of bishops and an age limit for Cardinal electors.
Is there a special Ordination given to bishops of Rome that I’m unaware of? It must give special graces so that age doesn’t matter.
If a bishop has to turn in his resignation at 75 and he only heads a local Church how much more appropriate would it be for the “universal bishop” to do the same.
Also, Cardinals can’t vote after 80 but recent popes reign longer than that.
Ah, the inconsistencies of papal power.
That’s always cracked me up.
It's really interesting to read about the college of cardinals from before the expansion and the retirement age. The entire college (and remember, there was no aging out of the role) was capped at 70 until the papacy of John XXIII. And before the general retirement age for bishops you'd see stuff like John Glennon, serving Archbishop of St Louis, being created Cardinal at 83, or Carlos de la Torre of Quito, created cardinal at 79 and continuing to serve as archbishop for another 14 years. Maybe the only comparable career since the retirement age was instituted is that of Kasimir Swiatek, one of those great bishops from behind the iron curtain who was created Cardinal by JPII at 80 and remained a diocesan administrator until a month before his death at 96.
Also the lack of correspondence between bishop retirement age and cardinal retirement age has caused problems. Gomez and Chaput were not named cardinals by Benedict because their predecessors were still under 80 and it would have been seen as an unfair boost to Philadelphia and L.A. to give them two voting cardinals. Then Francis came in with a new attitude toward cardinal-making and they never became cardinals at all.