Church law says that any man, even a layman, could be elected pope. In the case of a layman, once he accepts, he would be ordained a deacon, then a priest and then a bishop and then would become the pope and the Bishop of Rome.
I doubt that a layman would be named pope. But it is quite possible that any see that has had a cardinal, but because Pope Francis snubbed that region and did not name a cardinal, a bishop who is not a Cardinal could be elected pope from one of those sees.
Could he be from Los Angeles?
From Baltimore?
From Philadelphia?
From Milan?
From Venice?
From Paris?
From Ukraine?
Who could become pope who is not a Cardinal?
5 comments:
Chaput would be downright decent.
An Eastern pope would be nice, won't happen.
I agree on the first, while on the second, it depends upon how deadlocked might be assorted voting blocks, and how undivided cardinals might wish to pretend to be and dreading a lengthy conclave for that reason, where suprise might happen, and us accidentally end up with a good pope of suprises in a good way out of a compromise...personally, I'd be happy if the conclave lasted a year....they might actually know who they were electing, for a change.
Most Eastern bishops will refuse being created cardinals as it isn't our tradition....if that truly matters. Then, we lack the "spirit of" ethos, it's simply not our experience. Compounding that is many appointed by Francis either won't have familiarity with, or simply won't want to deal with our liturgical discipline. So many factors, us v them, I just feel that it is a significant longshot.
I agree it is a long, long, loooong shot, but, we're talking Rome, home of the original circus.....an Eastern bishop likely would also need have lessons even in Western liturgy, so TLM lovers likely would wait a while before ever seeing an Eastern pope celebrate one, he'd start with the far easier modern mass for dummies.
Post a Comment