The Holy See

This article is part of the series: Politics and government of the Holy See

The Roman Pontiff Benedict XVI Conclave College of Cardinals Dean of the College of Cardinals Camerlengo of the Holy Roman Church Secretariat of State Cardinal Secretary of State Tarcisio Bertone Secretary for Relations with States Congregations Doctrine of the Faith Oriental Churches Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments Causes of Saints Bishops Evangelization of Peoples Clergy Religious Catholic Education Tribunals Apostolic Signatura Roman Rota Apostolic Penitentiary Pontifical Councils Laity Promoting Christian Unity Family Justice and Peace "Cor Unum" Pastoral Care of Migrants and Itinerant People Pastoral Assistance to Health Care Workers Legislative Texts Interreligious Dialogue Culture Social Communications Promoting the New Evangelisation Administrative Services Apostolic Camera Administration of the Patrimony of the Apostolic See Prefecture for the Economic Affairs of the Holy See Institutes Prefecture of the Papal Household Liturgical Celebrations of the Supreme Pontiff Foreign relations Status in international law Lateran Treaty At the United Nations Multilateral foreign policy Concordats Diplomatic missions Nuncios Canon law 1983 Code of Canon Law Apostolic Constitution Pastor Bonus

Other countries · Atlas Politics portal view talk edit

The Sistine Chapel has been the location of the conclave since 1492.

A papal conclave is a meeting of the College of Cardinals convened, during a period of vacancy in the papal office, to elect a Bishop of Rome who then becomes the Pope. The Pope is considered by Roman Catholics to be the apostolic successor of Saint Peter and earthly head of the Roman Catholic Church.^[1] The conclave, the means and process for choosing the pope for little more than half of the time the church has been in existence, is now the oldest ongoing method for choosing the leader of an institution.^[2]

A history of political interference in these elections and consequently long vacancies between popes, and most immediately the interregnum of 1268–1271, prompted the Second Council of Lyons to decree in 1274 that the electors should be locked in seclusion cum clave (Latin for "with a key"), and not permitted to leave until a new Bishop of Rome had been elected. Conclaves are now held in the Sistine Chapel in the Palace of the Vatican.^[3]

Since the Apostolic Age, the Bishop of Rome (like other bishops) was chosen by the consensus of the clergy and people of Rome.^[4] The body of electors was more precisely defined when, in 1059, the College of Cardinals was designated the sole body of electors.^[5] Since then other details of the process have developed. In 1970, Pope Paul VI limited the electors to cardinals under 80 years of age. The Pope may change the procedures for electing his successor; the current^[update] procedures were established by Pope John Paul II in his constitution Universi Dominici Gregis^[6] and amended by a motu proprio of Pope Benedict XVI dated 11 June 2007.^[7][8] A two-thirds vote of the electorate is required to elect the new pope.

Historical development[link]

The procedures relating to the election of the Pope have undergone almost two millennia of development. Procedures similar to the present system were introduced in 1274 with the Second Council of Lyons after the three-year interregnum of 1268–1271.^[1]

The electorate[link]

As the Christian communities became established they started to elect bishops, chosen by the clergy and laity of the community with the assistance of the bishops of neighbouring dioceses.^[4] St. Cyprian says that Pope Cornelius was chosen Bishop of Rome "by the decree of God and of His Church, by the testimony of nearly all the clergy, by the college of aged bishops (sacerdotum), and of good men."^[9] As was true for bishops of other dioceses (see the story of St. Ambrose as late as 374),^[10] the clergy of the Diocese of Rome was the electoral body for the Bishop of Rome, but they did not cast votes, instead selecting the bishop by general consensus or by acclamation. The candidate would then be submitted to the people for their general approval or disapproval. This lack of precision in the election procedures gave rise to rival Popes or antipopes, and to avoid factions the Roman Emperor sometimes confirmed the selection.^[11]

The Lateran Synod held in 769 officially abolished the theoretical suffrage held by the Roman people, though in 862, a Synod of Rome restored it to Roman noblemen.^[11] The pope was also subjected to oaths of loyalty to the Holy Roman Emperor, whose task it was to provide security and public peace in Rome.^[12] A major change was introduced in 1059, when Nicholas II decreed in In Nomine Domini that the cardinals were to elect a candidate, who would take office after receiving the assent of the clergy and laity. The most senior cardinals, the cardinal bishops, were to meet first and discuss the candidates before summoning the cardinal priests and cardinal deacons for the actual vote.^[9] Imperial confirmation was dropped.^[13] The Second Council of the Lateran in 1139 removed the requirement that the assent of the lower clergy and the laity be obtained.^[11]

Through much of the Middle Ages and Renaissance there were fewer than 30 cardinals, and there were as few as seven under Pope Alexander IV (1254–1261).^[14] Difficult travel further reduced the number arriving at the conclave. With a small electorate an individual vote was significant, and was not easily shaken from familial or political lines. Conclaves could last months and even years. The long interregnum following the death of Clement IV in 1268 caused Gregory X and the Second Council of Lyons in 1274 to decree that the electors should be locked in seclusion, and their food rationed should they fail to choose a candidate in three to eight days.^[11] The strict rules of the conclave were disliked by the cardinals and suspended by John XXI (1276–1277). Lengthy elections continued to be the norm until 1294 when a pious Benedictine hermit admonished the cardinals. The cardinals elected this same monk as Pope Celestine V, whose main acts as Pope were to reinstate the strict conclave, and to resign the papacy.^[15] He was declared a saint in 1313.

In 1378, after the death of the French-born Gregory XI, the Romans circled the Quirinal Palace where the voting was taking place. They kept shouting to ensure the election an Italian, preferably Roman, Pontiff, since the Church had gone through over seventy years of French popes subservient to the French king. The pressure was felt by the mostly French cardinals in conclave. At last the cardinals complied by choosing an archbishop, Urban VI, who was not even a cardinal.

For Urban, who'd been at the beck and call of Their Excellencies, the papacy went to his head and be became an impossible taskmaster. After a few months of his depotism, the French and the single Spanish cardinal, Pedro de Luna, slipped out of Rome traveling first to Fondi and thence back to Avignon where they elected another "pope" claiming intimidation by the Roman throngs. The Council of Pisa met in 1409 to resolve the conflict, but only managed to elect a third claimant. The conflict, known as the Great Western Schism, was only resolved at the Council of Constance which met between 1414 and 1418. The Roman Gregory XII humbly abdicated in 1415, and the council deposed the Pisan and Avignon claimants. Pope Martin V was then elected, ending the confusion but leaving the Church in a weakened state, open for the Protestant Revolt a century later.

With the election of Martin V it was declared at Constance that councils would have authority over the Pope, making him a mere executive, and that a valid papal election could not be undone. Martin never accepted the theory of Conciliarism nor did any of his successors. ^[16]

In 1587, Sixtus V fixed the number of cardinals to 70, following the precedent of Moses who was assisted by 70 elders in governing the Children of Israel (Numbers 11:16): six cardinal bishops, 50 cardinal priests, and 14 cardinal deacons.^[14] Beginning with John XXIII's attempts to broaden the representation of nations in the College of Cardinals, that number has increased. In 1970, Paul VI decreed that cardinals upon reaching the age of eighty were ineligible to vote in the conclave, and also increased the number of active cardinal electors to 120. Though this remains the theoretical limit, John Paul II exceeded this for short periods of time with knowledge of impending retirements. John Paul II also specified that cardinals who were under eighty on the day the Holy See became vacant were still entitled to vote even if they had turned eighty by the time the conclave started. Of the 182 cardinals at that time, 116 were under eighty years of age.^[17]

Choice of the electors[link]

Originally, lay status did not bar election to the Bishop of Rome: bishops of dioceses were sometimes elected even while still catechumens (as St. Ambrose, supra). In 769, in the wake of the violent dispute over the election of antipope Constantine II, Pope Stephen III held a synod which ruled that the entire clergy of Rome had a right to vote for the Bishop of Rome, but that only a "cardinal priest" or "cardinal deacon" could be elected (this is the first use of the term "cardinal" and the "cardinal bishops" were specifically excluded).^[9][18] Nicholas II, in the synod of 1059, modified this to give preference to the clergy of Rome in the choice, but the cardinal bishops were also free to select a candidate from elsewhere.^[13] In 1179, the Third Council of the Lateran reversed earlier requirements, once more allowing any Catholic man to be elected by the cardinals. (This does not mean a layman elected would remain an unordained layman while serving as pope; see acceptance and proclamation below.) Urban VI in 1378 was the last Pope elected from outside the cardinals. In more recent history it is reported that Archbishop Giovanni Montini of Milan received several votes in the conclave of 1958 despite not being a cardinal.^[19] The new pope John XXIII made Montini a cardinal almost immediately, and would be succeeded by him as Pope Paul VI in 1963.

Though the pope's core title is "Bishop of Rome", he need not be of Italian background. Before Netherlands-born Adrian VI, who was elected in 1522, popes came from a wide variety of geographic areas and linguistic groups. From Adrian VI until the Polish John Paul II, all the popes were from areas that are now part of Italy. However, this bears little of the modern connotation of "Italian": before unification in the second half of the nineteenth century, geographical Italy was composed of independent republics and kingdoms; parts of it were controlled by powers such as France or the Holy Roman Empire. The Papal States (in the middle of the Italian "boot") formed a country until the official unification of modern Italy in 1861. In many cases, the distinction between Italian and non-Italian was meaningless compared to that between Roman and non-Roman, Florentine and Venetian, or various political and familial alliances. The present incumbent of the Diocese of Rome, Benedict XVI, is German.^[20]

In theory, any baptised male Catholic (except a heretic or schismatic) can be elected pope by the College of Cardinals. As the Catholic Church holds that women cannot be validly ordained, and the pope is, by definition, the Bishop of Rome, women have never been eligible for the papacy. Claims that there was a female Pope, including the legendary Pope Joan, are fictitious.^[21]

Until 1179, a simple majority sufficed for an election, when the Third Lateran Council increased the required majority to two-thirds. Cardinals were not allowed to vote for themselves; an elaborate procedure was adopted to ensure secrecy while at the same time preventing self-voting.^[22] In 1945, Pius XII increased the requisite majority to two-thirds plus one. In 1996, John Paul's constitution allowed election by absolute majority if deadlock prevailed after thirty-three or thirty-four ballots.^[6] In 2007 Pope Benedict XVI rescinded John Paul's change (which had been criticised as effectively abolishing the two-thirds majority requirement, as any majority would suffice to block the election until a simple majority was enough to elect the next pope), reaffirming the requirement of a two-thirds majority.^[23]

Electors formerly made choices by three methods: by acclamation, compromise or scrutiny. If voting by acclamation, the cardinals would unanimously declare the new pope quasi afflati Spiritu Sancto (as if inspired by the Holy Spirit). If voting by compromise, the deadlocked College would select a committee of cardinals to conduct an election. In reality voting was done by scrutiny with the electors casting secret ballots.^[24] The last election by compromise is thought to be that of John XXII (1316), and the last election by acclamation that of Gregory XV (1621). New rules introduced by John Paul II have formally abolished these long-unused systems and election is always by totally secret ballot.^[6]

Secular influence[link]

For a significant part of its history, the Church was influenced in the choice of its leaders by powerful monarchs and governments. For example, the Roman Emperors once held considerable sway in the elections of popes. In 418, Honorius settled a controversial election, upholding Boniface I over the challenger Eulalius.^[25] He ordered that in future cases, any controverted election would be settled by a fresh election; the method was never applied before its lapse. After the demise of the Western Roman Empire, influence passed to the Ostrogothic Kings of Italy and in 532, John II formally recognised the right of the Ostrogothic monarchs to ratify elections. By the end of the 530s, the Ostrogothic monarchy had been overthrown, and power passed to the Byzantine Emperors (known as the Eastern Roman Emperors). A procedure was adopted whereby officials were required to notify the Exarch of Ravenna (who would relay the information to the Byzantine Emperor) upon the death of a pope before proceeding with the election. Once the electors arrived at a choice, they were required to send a delegation to Constantinople requesting the Emperor's consent, which was necessary before the individual elected could take office. Lengthy delays were caused by the sojourns to and from Constantinople; when Benedict II complained about them, Emperor Constantine IV acquiesced, ending the requirement that elections be confirmed by emperors. Thereafter, the Emperor was only required to be notified; the requirement was dispensed with by Pope Zachary.

In the 9th century, a new empire—the Holy Roman Empire, which was German, not Italian—came to exert control over the elections of popes. While the first two Holy Roman Emperors, Charlemagne and Louis, did not interfere with the Church, Lothar claimed that an election could not be conducted except in the presence of imperial ambassadors. In 898, riots forced John IX to recognise the superintendence of the Holy Roman Emperor; the local secular rulers in Rome also continued to exert a great influence, especially during the tenth century period known as Saeculum obscurum (Latin for the dark age).

In 1059, the same papal bull that restricted suffrage to the cardinals also recognised the authority of the Holy Roman Emperor, at the time Henry IV, but only as a concession made by the pope, thus establishing that the Holy Roman Emperor had no authority to intervene in elections except where permitted to do so by papal agreements. Pope Gregory VII was the last to submit to the interference of the Holy Roman Emperors; the breach between him and the Holy Roman Empire caused by the Investiture Controversy led to the abolition of the Emperor's role.^[26] In 1119, the Holy Roman Empire acceded to the Concordat of Worms, accepting the papal decision.

From the sixteenth century, certain Catholic monarchs were allowed to exercise the so-called right of exclusion or veto. By an informal convention, each nation was allowed to veto one candidate; any decision made by a nation was conveyed by one of its cardinals. The power of exclusion was, by the same custom, only exercisable once. Therefore, the nation's cardinals did not announce the use of the power until the very last moment when the candidate in question seemed likely to get elected. No vetoes could be employed after an election. After the Holy Roman Empire was dissolved in 1806, its place was taken by Austria (which was a part of the Empire and whose ruler was also Holy Roman Emperor). Austria was the last power to exercise the veto, when in 1903 Cardinal Jan Maurycy Pawel Puzyna de Kosielsko informed the College of Cardinals that Austria opposed the election of Mariano Rampolla (who had received 29 out of 60 votes in one ballot). Consequently, the College chose Giuseppe Sarto with 55 votes. Cardinal Sarto chose the name Pius X and abolished the right of the secular veto, declaring that any cardinal who communicated his government's veto would suffer excommunication.^[27]

Conclaves[link]

In earlier years, papal elections sometimes suffered prolonged deadlocks. To resolve them, authorities often resorted to the forced seclusion of the cardinal electors. The method was adopted in 1216 by the city of Perugia and in 1241 by the city of Rome. After the death of Clement IV in 1268, the city of Viterbo also had to resort to seclusion of the cardinals in the episcopal palace. When the cardinals still failed to elect a pope, the city refused to send in any materials except bread and water. When even this failed to produce a result, the townspeople removed the roof. The cardinals then elected Gregory X, ending an interregnum of almost three years. Six of the sixteen cardinals present were delegated by the remaining ten to make the choice for all, and they wrote down their choices until all six agreed. The remaining ten accepted the one chosen by these six.^[28]

To reduce further delays, Gregory X introduced stringent rules relating to the election procedures. Cardinals were to be secluded in a closed area and were not even accorded separate rooms. No cardinal was allowed, unless ill, to be attended by more than one servant. Food was to be supplied through a window; after three days of the meeting, the cardinals were to receive only one dish a day; after five days, they were to receive just bread and water. During the conclave, no cardinal was to receive any ecclesiastical revenue.^[29]

Gregory X's strict regulations were abrogated in 1276 by Adrian V, but Celestine V, elected in 1294 following a two-year vacancy, restored them. In 1562, Pius IV issued a papal bull that introduced regulations relating to the enclosure of the conclave and other procedures. Gregory XV issued two bulls that covered the most minute of details relating to the election; the first, in 1621, concerned electoral processes, while the other, in 1622, fixed the ceremonies to be observed. In 1904, Pope Pius X issued a constitution consolidating almost all the previous rules, making some revamps. Several reforms were also instituted by John Paul II in 1996.^[1]

The location of the conclaves was not fixed until the fourteenth century. Since the Western Schism, however, elections have always been held in Rome (except in 1800, when French troops occupying Rome forced the election to be held in Venice), and normally in what, since the Lateran Treaties of 1929, has become the independent Vatican City State. Since 1846, when the Quirinal Palace was used, the Sistine Chapel in the Vatican has always served as the location of the election. Popes have often fine-tuned the rules for the election of their successors: Pope Pius XII's Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis of 1945 governed the conclave of 1958, Pope John XXIII's Summi Pontificis Electio of 1962 that of 1963, Pope Paul VI's Romano Pontifici Eligendo of 1975 those of 1978, and John Paul II's Universi Dominici Gregis of 1996 that of 2005.^[30]

Modern practice[link]

In 1996, John Paul II promulgated a new Apostolic Constitution, called Universi Dominici Gregis (The Lord's Whole Flock), which, with a slight modification by Pope Benedict XVI now governs the election of the Pope, abrogating all previous constitutions on the matter, but preserving many procedures that date to much earlier times.

Under Universi Dominici Gregis, the cardinals are to be lodged in a purpose-built edifice, the Domus Sanctae Marthae, but are to continue to vote in the Sistine Chapel.^[31]

Several duties are performed by the Dean of the College of Cardinals, who is always a Cardinal Bishop. If the Dean is not entitled to participate in the conclave due to age, his place is taken by the Sub-Dean, who is also always a Cardinal Bishop. If the Sub-Dean also cannot participate, the senior Cardinal Bishop participating performs the functions.^[32]

Since the College of Cardinals is a small body, some^[who?] have suggested that the electorate should be expanded. Proposed reforms include a plan to replace the College of Cardinals as the electoral body with the Synod of Bishops, which includes many more members. Under present procedure, however, the Synod may only meet while called by the Pope. Universi Dominici Gregis explicitly provides that even if a Synod or ecumenical council is in session at the time of a Pope's death, it may not perform the election. Upon the Pope's death, either body's proceedings are suspended, to be resumed only upon the order of the new Pope.^[33]

It is considered poor form to campaign for the position of Pope. However, there is inevitably always much speculation about which Cardinals have serious prospects of being elected. Speculation tends to mount when a Pope is ill or aged and shortlists of potential candidates appear in the media. A Cardinal who is considered to be a prospect for the papacy is referred to informally as being papabile (an adjective used substantively: the plural form is papabili), a term coined by Italian-speaking Vatican watchers in the mid-twentieth century.^[34] The Italian is pronounced 'pap-AH-bee-lay/lee, and means roughly 'Pope-able'.

Death of the Pope[link]

The Cardinal Camerlengo proclaims a papal death.

The death of the Pope is verified by the Cardinal Camerlengo, or Chamberlain, who traditionally performed the task by gently striking the Pope's head with a small silver hammer and calling out his Christian (not papal) name three times. During the twentieth century the use of the hammer in this ritual has been abandoned; under Universi Dominici Gregis, the Camerlengo must merely declare the Pope's death in the presence of the Master of Papal Liturgical Celebrations, and of the Cleric Prelates, Secretary and Chancellor of the Apostolic Camera. The Cardinal Camerlengo takes possession of the Ring of the Fisherman worn by the Pope; the Ring, along with the papal seal, is later destroyed before the College of Cardinals. The tradition originated to avoid forgery of documents, but today merely is a symbol of the end of the pope's reign.^[35]

During the sede vacante, as the papal vacancy is known, certain limited powers pass to the College of Cardinals, which is convoked by the Dean of the College of Cardinals. All cardinals are obliged to attend the General Congregation of Cardinals, except those whose health does not permit, or who are over eighty (but those cardinals may choose to attend if they please). The Particular Congregation, which deals with the day-to-day matters of the Church, includes the Cardinal Camerlengo and the three Cardinal Assistants—one Cardinal-Bishop, one Cardinal-Priest and one Cardinal-Deacon—chosen by lot. Every three days, new Cardinal Assistants are chosen by lot. The Cardinal Camerlengo and Cardinal Assistants are responsible, among other things, for maintaining the election's secrecy.^[36]

The Congregations must make certain arrangements in respect of the Pope's burial, which by tradition takes place within four to six days of the Pope's death, leaving time for pilgrims to see the dead pontiff, and is to be followed by a nine-day period of mourning (this is known as the novemdiales, Latin for "nine days"). The Congregations also fix the date and time of the commencement of the conclave. The conclave normally takes place fifteen days after the death of the Pope, but the Congregations may extend the period to a maximum of twenty days in order to permit other cardinals to arrive in the Vatican City.^[37]

A vacancy in the papal office may also result from a papal resignation, though no pope has abdicated since Gregory XII in 1415.^[38]

Beginning of the election[link]

The cardinals hear two sermons before the election: one before actually entering the conclave, and one once they are settled in the Sistine Chapel. In both cases, the sermons are meant to lay out the current state of the Church, and to suggest the qualities necessary for a pope to possess in that specific time. The first preacher in the 2005 conclave was Fr. Raniero Cantalamessa, the preacher of the papal household and a member of the Capuchin Franciscan order, who spoke at one of the meetings of the cardinals held before the actual day when the conclave began.^[39] Cardinal Tomáš Špidlík, a former professor at the Pontifical Oriental Institute and a retired (thus, non-voting) member of the College of Cardinals, spoke just before the doors were finally closed for the conclave.^[40]

On the morning of the day designated by the Congregations of Cardinals, the cardinal electors assemble in St Peter's Basilica to celebrate the Eucharist. Then, they gather in the afternoon in the Pauline Chapel of the Palace of the Vatican, proceeding to the Sistine Chapel while singing the Veni Creator Spiritus.^[41] The Cardinals then take an oath to observe the procedures set down by the apostolic constitutions; to, if elected, defend the liberty of the Holy See; to maintain secrecy; and to disregard the instructions of secular authorities on voting. The Cardinal Dean reads the oath aloud in full; in order of precedence, the other cardinal electors merely state, while touching the Gospels, that they "do so promise, pledge and swear."^[42]

After all the cardinals present have taken the oath, the Master of the Papal Liturgical Celebrations orders all individuals other than the cardinals and conclave participants to leave the Chapel—traditionally, he stands at the door of the Sistine Chapel and calls out or states "Extra omnes!", Latin for, roughly, "Everybody else, out!" He then closes the door.^[43]

The Master himself may remain, as may one ecclesiastic designated by the Congregations prior to the commencement of the election. The ecclesiastic makes a speech concerning the problems facing the Church and on the qualities the new Pope needs to have. After the speech concludes, the ecclesiastic leaves. Following the recitation of prayers, the Cardinal Dean asks if any doubts relating to procedure remain. After the clarification of the doubts, the election may commence. Cardinals who arrive after the conclave has begun are admitted nevertheless. An ill cardinal may leave the conclave and later be readmitted; a cardinal who leaves for any reason other than illness may not return to the conclave.^[44]

Although in the past cardinal electors could be accompanied by attendants ("conclavists"), now only a nurse may accompany a cardinal who for reasons of ill-health, as confirmed by the Congregation of Cardinals, needs such assistance.^[45] The Secretary of the College of Cardinals, the Master of Papal Liturgical Celebrations, two Masters of Ceremonies, two officers of the Papal Sacristy and an ecclesiastic assisting the Dean of the College of Cardinals are also admitted to the conclave. Priests are available to hear confessions in different languages; two doctors are also admitted. Finally, a strictly limited number of servant staff are permitted for housekeeping and the preparing and serving of meals. Secrecy is maintained during the conclave; the cardinals as well as the conclavists and staff are not permitted to disclose any information relating to the election. Cardinal electors may not correspond or converse with anyone outside the conclave, by post, radio, telephone or otherwise and eavesdropping is an offense punishable by excommunication latae sententiae—in fact, before the conclave that elected Pope Benedict XVI, the Sistine Chapel was "swept" using the latest electronic devices to detect any hidden "bugs" or surveillance devices (there were no reports that any were found, but in previous conclaves there were discovered press reporters who had disguised themselves as conclave servants). Universi Dominici Gregis specifically prohibits media such as newspapers, the radio, and television.^[46]

Voting[link]

Cardinals formerly used these intricate ballot papers, one of which is shown folded above. Currently, the ballots are simple cards, folded once (like a note card), with the words "I elect as Supreme Pontiff ....." printed on them.

On the afternoon of the first day, one ballot may be held. If a ballot takes place on the afternoon of the first day and no-one is elected, or no ballot had taken place, four ballots are held on each successive day: two in each morning and two in each afternoon. Before voting in the morning and again before voting in the afternoon, the electors take an oath to obey the rules of the conclave. If no result is obtained after three vote days of balloting, the process is suspended for a maximum of one day for prayer and an address by the senior Cardinal Deacon. After seven further ballots, the process may again be similarly suspended, with the address now being delivered by the senior Cardinal Priest. If, after another seven ballots, no result is achieved, voting is suspended once more, the address being delivered by the senior Cardinal Bishop. After a further seven ballots, there shall be a day of prayer, reflection and dialogue. In the following ballots, only the two names who received the most votes in the last ballot shall be eligible in a runoff election. However, the two people who are being voted on, if Cardinal electors shall not themselves have the right to vote.^[7]

The process of voting comprises three phases: the "pre-scrutiny", the "scrutiny", and the "post-scrutiny." During the pre-scrutiny, the Masters of the Ceremonies prepare ballot papers bearing the words Eligo in Summum Pontificem ("I elect as Supreme Pontiff") and provide at least two to each cardinal elector. As the cardinals begin to write down their votes, the Secretary of the College of Cardinals, the Master of Papal Liturgical Celebrations and the Masters of Ceremonies exit; the junior Cardinal Deacon then closes the door. The junior Cardinal Deacon then draws by lot nine names; the first three become Scrutineers, the second three Infirmarii and the last three Revisers. New Scrutineers, Infirmarii and Revisers are not selected again after the first scrutiny; the same nine cardinals perform the same task for the second scrutiny. After lunch, the election resumes with the oath to obey the rules of the conclave taken anew when the cardinals again assemble in the Sistine Chapel. Nine names are chosen for new scrutineers, infirmarii, and revisers. The third scrutiny then commences, and if necessary, a fourth immediately follows.

The scrutiny phase of the election is as follows: The cardinal electors proceed, in order of precedence, to take their completed ballots (which bear only the name of the individual voted for) to the altar, where the Scrutineers stand. Before casting the ballot, each cardinal elector takes a Latin oath, which translates to: "I call as my witness Christ the Lord who will be my judge, that my vote is given to the one who before God I think should be elected." If any cardinal elector is in the Chapel, but cannot proceed to the altar due to infirmity, the last Scrutineer may go to him and take his ballot after the oath is recited. If any cardinal elector is by reason of infirmity confined to his room, the Infirmarii go to their rooms with ballot papers and a box. Any such sick cardinals take the oath and then complete the ballot papers. When the Infirmarii return to the Chapel, the ballots are counted to ensure that their number matches with the number of ill cardinals; thereafter, they are deposited in the appropriate receptacle. This oath is taken by all cardinals as they cast their ballots. If no one is chosen on the first scrutiny, then a second scrutiny immediately follows. A total of four scrutinies are taken each day, two in the morning and two in the afternoon.

The oath when casting one's vote is therefore anonymous, since the name of the elector is no longer signed on the ballot with that of the candidate. (Previously, the ballot was also signed by the elector and then folded over to cover the signature of the elector and then sealed to result in a semi-secret ballot. See example above.) This was the procedure prior to 1945. Above is a copy of the old three section semi-secret ballot, which was last used in the conclave of 1939. There was no oath taken when actually casting ballots, prior to 1621. Completely secret ballots (at the option of the cardinals present and voting) were sometimes used prior to 1621, but these secret ballots had no oath taken when the vote was actually cast. At some conclaves prior to 1621, the cardinals verbally voted and sometimes stood in groups to facilitate counting the votes cast. The signature of the elector covered by a folded-over part of the ballot paper was added by Gregory XV in 1621, to prevent anyone from casting the deciding vote for himself. Cardinal Pole of England refused to cast the deciding vote for himself in 1549 (and was not elected), but in 1492 Cardinal Borgia (Alexander VI) did cast the deciding vote for himself. Faced by the mortal challenge to the papacy emanating from Protestantism, and fearing schism due to several stormy conclaves in the late 16th and early 17th centuries, Gregory XV established this procedure to prevent any cardinal from casting the deciding vote for himself. Since 1945, a cardinal can again cast the deciding vote for himself, though the 2/3 majority rule has always been continued, except when John Paul II had modified that rule in 1996 (after 33 ballots, a simple majority was sufficient), with the 2/3 majority rule restored in 2007 by Benedict XVI.

Prior to 1621, the only oath taken was that of obedience to the rules of the conclave in force at that time, when the cardinals entered the conclave and the doors were locked, and each morning and afternoon as they entered the Sistine Chapel to vote. Gregory XV added the additional oath, taken when each cardinal casts his ballot, to prevent cardinals wasting time in casting "courtesy votes" and instead narrowing the number of realistic candidates for the papal throne to perhaps only two or three. Speed in electing a pope was important, and that meant using an oath so as to get the cardinals down to the serious business of electing a new pope and narrowing the number of potentially electable candidates. The reforms of Gregory XV in 1621 and reaffirmed in 1622 created the written detailed step-by-step procedure used in choosing a pope; a procedure that was essentially the same as that which was used in 2005 to elect Benedict XVI. The biggest change since 1621 was the elimination of the rule that required the electors to sign their ballots resulting in the detailed voting procedure of scrutiny making use of anonymous oaths. This was perhaps the most significant change in the modern era detailed voting procedure, since that detailed voting procedure was first created in 1621. It was Pius XII who made this change in 1945.

Once all votes have been cast, the first Scrutineer chosen shakes the container, and the last Scrutineer removes and counts the ballots. If the number of ballots does not correspond to the number of cardinal electors present, the ballots are burnt, unread, and the vote is repeated. If, however, no irregularities are observed, the ballots may be opened and the votes counted. Each ballot is unfolded by the first Scrutineer; all three Scrutineers separately write down the name indicated on the ballot. The last of the Scrutineers reads the name aloud.

Once all of the ballots have been opened, the final post-scrutiny phase begins. The Scrutineers add up all of the votes, and the Revisers check the ballots and the names on the Scrutineers' lists to ensure that no error was made. The ballots are then all burnt by the Scrutineers with the assistance of the Secretary of the College and the Masters of Ceremonies. If the first scrutiny held in any given morning or afternoon does not result in an election, the cardinals proceed to the next scrutiny immediately; the papers from both scrutinies are burnt together at the end of the second scrutiny. The colour of the smoke signals the results to the people assembled in St Peter's Square. Dark smoke signals that the ballot did not result in an election, while white smoke signals that a new Pope was chosen. Originally, damp straw was added to the fire to create dark smoke; beginning in 1963 coloring chemicals have been added, and beginning in 2005 bells ring after a successful election, to augment the white smoke, and especially if the white smoke is not unambiguously white.^[47] Prior to 1945 (the year Pius XII changed the form of ballot to use anonymous oaths, first carried out in 1958), when the ballots were of the more complex type illustrated above, the sealing wax which was used in those ballots had an effect in making the smoke from burning the ballots either black or white, depending on whether damp straw was added or not. This explains the confusion over the color of the smoke in the conclave of 1958, with coloring chemicals added beginning in 1963.

Acceptance and proclamation[link]

Once the election concludes, the Cardinal Dean summons the Secretary of the College of Cardinals and the Master of Papal Liturgical Celebrations into the hall. The Cardinal Dean then asks the Pope-elect if he assents to the election, saying in Latin: "Acceptasne electionem de te canonice factam in Summum Pontificem? (Do you accept your canonical election as Supreme Pontiff?)." There is no requirement that the Pope-elect do so: he is free to say "non accepto" (I don't accept). In practice, however, any potential Pope-elect who intends not to accept will explicitly state this before he has been given a sufficient number of votes to become Pope. This has happened in modern times with Giovanni Colombo in October 1978.^[48]

If he accepts, and is already a bishop, he immediately takes office. If he is not a bishop, however, he must be first consecrated as one before he can assume office. If a priest is elected, the Cardinal Dean consecrates him bishop; if a layman is elected, then the Cardinal Dean first ordains him deacon, then priest, and only then consecrates him as bishop. Only after becoming a bishop does the Pope-elect take office.

(The above functions of the Dean are assumed, if necessary, by the sub-Dean, and if the sub-Dean is also impeded, they are assumed by the senior cardinal-bishop in attendance. Notice that in 2005 the Dean himself—Joseph Ratzinger—was elected Pope.)

Since 533, the new Pope has also decided on the name by which he is to be called at this time. Pope John II was the first to adopt a new papal name; he felt that his original name, Mercurius, was inappropriate, as it was also the name of a Roman god. In most cases, even if such considerations are absent, Popes tend to choose new papal names; the last Pope to reign under his baptismal name was Pope Marcellus II (1555). After the newly-elected Pope accepts his election, the Cardinal Dean asks him about his papal name, saying in Latin: "Quo nomine vis vocari? (By what name do you wish to be called?)." After the papal name is chosen, the officials are readmitted to the conclave, and the Master of Pontifical Liturgical Ceremonies writes a document recording the acceptance and the new name of the Pope.

Later, the new Pope goes to the "Room of Tears", a small red room next to the Sistine Chapel. The Pope dresses by himself, choosing a set of pontifical choir robes (white cassock, rochet and red mozzetta) among three sizes: small, medium and large. Then, he vests in a gold corded pectoral cross and a red embroidered stole. He wears a white zucchetto on his head.

Next, the senior Cardinal Deacon (the Cardinal Protodeacon) appears at the main balcony of the basilica's façade to proclaim the new pope with the Latin phrase:

It has happened in the past that the Cardinal Protodeacon has himself been the person elected Pope. In such an event the announcement is made by the next senior Deacon, who has thus succeeded as Protodeacon. During the election of Pope Leo XIII in 1878 Protodeacon Prospero Caterini was physically incapable of completing the announcement, so another made it for him.

The new Pope then gives his first apostolic blessing, Urbi et Orbi ("to the City [Rome] and to the World").

Formerly, the Pope would later be crowned by the triregnum or Triple Tiara at the Papal Coronation. John Paul I, John Paul II, and Benedict XVI did not want an elaborate coronation, choosing instead to have a simpler Papal Inauguration ceremony.^[49]

Historical voting patterns[link]

The newly elected pope often contrasts dramatically with his predecessor, a tendency expressed by the Italian saying "After a fat pope, a lean pope". Past cardinals have often voted for someone radically different from the pope who appointed them. The controversial one-time populist-turned-conservative, long-lived Pope Pius IX (1846–1878) was succeeded by the aristocratic and diplomatic Pope Leo XIII (1878–1903). He in turn was succeeded by the lower-class, bluntly outspoken Pope Pius X (1903–1914). Pius X's rugged ultra-conservatism contrasted with the low-key moderatism of Pope Benedict XV (1914–1922), which again contrasted with the former librarian and mountain climber Pope Pius XI (1922–1939), who led Roman Catholicism with an authoritarianism more akin to Pius X, who also shared his temper.

Pius XI was succeeded in 1939 by the aristocratic ultra-insider Curialist, Pius XI's Secretary of State, Pope Pius XII (1939–1958). Pius XII was seen as one of the great thinkers in the papacy in the 20th century. He was also the ultimate insider; his family were descended from the Roman aristocracy, with his brother working as a lawyer for the Holy See. Pius was succeeded by the lower-class, elderly, popular, informal Pope John XXIII (1958–1963). The contrast between diffident, intellectual and distant Pius XII and the humble—in his own words "ordinary"—"Good Pope John" was dramatic, with none more surprised at the election than Pope John himself, who had his own return rail ticket in his pocket when he was elected.

John proved to be a radical break with the two previous popes, and indeed with most of the popes of the 20th century. After a short but dramatic pontificate during which he convoked the Second Vatican Council which resulted in wide ranging changes in the church, the surprise John was replaced by the widely expected choice Giovanni Batista Montini, who many believed would have been elected in 1958, had he been a cardinal then. Like Pius XII, Montini (Pope Paul VI) (1963–1978) was a curialist. He had worked with Pacelli in the 1930s and 1940s in the curia. Yet Pope Paul VI was succeeded (albeit for a short time) by the non-curialist Pope John Paul I (1978), who gave the impression of being no insider, but "a simple, holy man".^[50] He in turn was succeeded by the first non-Italian since 1523, Pope John Paul II (1978–2005), who spoke many languages and was originally from the Eastern Bloc (an important consideration given Cold War politics and the Church's repression in the East). He was succeeded in 2005 by the German Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and Dean of the College of Cardinals Joseph Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI).^[51]

See also[link]

• Elective monarchy
• Sede vacante
• Papal resignation
• List of papal conclaves
• Accessus
• Conclave capitulation
• Conclavist

Notes[link]

References[link]

External links[link]

• [2]
• Papal elections and conclaves by century (details of each conclave from 1061 to 2005)
• Details of conclaves, by Prof. J.P. Adams (extensive references)
• Conclave Bibliography: list of books and articles in various languages (Prof. J.P. Adams)

Italian documentary on YouTube (English subtitled)

• The Conclave in history - Part 1 of 3
• The Conclave in history - Part 2 of 3
• The Conclave in history - Part 3 of 3

v t e Papal symbols and rituals Apostolic Palace Camauro Coat of arms Conclave Coronation Fanon Flabellum Holy See Inauguration Mitre Mozzetta Papal Basilicas Papal Cross Pallium Popemobile Regalia and insignia Ring of the Fisherman Archbasilica of St. John Lateran St. Peter's Basilica Saint Peter's Square Sedia gestatoria Sistine Chapel Tiara Vatican City

Donald William Wuerl (born November 12, 1940) is an American cardinal of the Catholic Church. He is the sixth and current Archbishop of Washington, serving since 2006. He previously served as Auxiliary Bishop of Seattle (1986-87) and Bishop of Pittsburgh (1988-2006). He was created a cardinal by Pope Benedict XVI in 2010.

Early life and education[link]

Donald Wuerl was born in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, the second of four children of Francis and Mary Anna (née Schiffauer) Wuerl.^[1] He has two brothers, Wayne and Dennis, and a sister, Carol.^[2] His father worked nights weighing freight cars for the Pennsylvania Railroad, and served in the Navy during World War II.^[2] His mother died in 1944, and his father married Kathryn Cavanaugh in 1946.^[2]

Wuerl received his early education at the parochial school of St. Mary of the Mount Church in the Mount Washington neighborhood of Pittsburgh, graduating in 1958.^[3] He then attended the Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C., where he was a Basselin Scholar at Theological College.^[4] He there earned a Bachelor's degree (1962) and Master's degree (1963) in philosophy.^[5]

He continued his studies at the Pontifical North American College in Rome.^[1] He earned a master's degree in theology from the Pontifical Gregorian University in 1967. After ordination, he studied at the Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas in Rome, obtaining his doctorate in theology in 1974.

Early career[link]

He was ordained a priest on December 17, 1966.^[6] His first assignment was as assistant pastor at St. Rosalia parish in Pittsburgh's Greenfield neighborhood and as secretary to then-Pittsburgh bishop John Wright, who was elevated to cardinal in 1969; Wuerl was his full-time secretary in Vatican City from 1969 until Wright's death in 1979.

Because Cardinal Wright had to use a wheelchair due to his severe arthritis in 1978, Wuerl, as Wright's secretary, was one of three non-cardinals permitted inside the conclave, which selected Karol Wojtyla as Pope John Paul II.^[7]

Wuerl was rector at St. Paul Seminary in Pittsburgh from 1981 to 1985. In 1982, he was made executive secretary to Bishop John Marshall for a papally mandated study of U.S. seminaries.

Episcopal career[link]

Auxiliary Bishop of Seattle[link]

Wuerl was appointed titular bishop of Rosemarkie and auxiliary bishop of the Archdiocese of Seattle on December 3, 1985,^[6] which was controversial, in that he was to take over much of Archbishop Raymond Hunthausen's authority by being given "complete and final decision-making power" in several key areas.^[8] He was given complete authority over liturgy, the archdiocesan tribunal, seminarians and priestly formation, laicized priests, and issues of health care and ministry to homosexuals.

Wuerl was ordained bishop on January 6, 1986,^[6] at St. Peter's Basilica in Rome, Italy by Pope John Paul II.

Bishop of Pittsburgh[link]

Wuerl was appointed as the eleventh bishop of the Diocese of Pittsburgh on February 12, 1988^[6] and installed on March 25, 1988.^[6]

In 1989, Wuerl merged Sacred Heart and St. Paul Cathedral high schools to establish Oakland Catholic High School (all female-only schools) in the Oakland neighborhood of Pittsburgh, using the buildings at St. Paul Cathedral High School.^[9]

Wuerl launched and hosted a television program, The Teaching of Christ, in 1990 and wrote an adult catechism with the same name. He taught at Duquesne University in Pittsburgh as a distinguished service professor. Wuerl has served as a chaplain since 1999 for the Order of Malta, Federal Association, U.S.A., a division of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, commonly referred to as the Knights of Malta.^[10] Wuerl has also written regular columns in Columbia, the major publication of the Knights of Columbus in the United States.^[11]

Wuerl closed 73 church buildings, which included 37 churches, and reduced 331 parishes by 117 through merging while bishop of Pittsburgh; he was managing the remaining 214 parishes when he left in June 2006.^[12] Wuerl's plan, The Parish Reorganization and Revitalization Project,^[13] is now used as a model for other dioceses seeking parish suppression. The mansion that housed Wuerl for over two decades, as well as his four predecessors, in the Diocese of Pittsburgh was sold since the new bishop, David Zubik, decided to live at St. Paul's Seminary. The Jacobethan Revival house along Fifth Avenue, at 9,842 square feet (914.4 m²) with 39 rooms, which include 11 bedrooms, six full baths, and a half-bath, had an appraised value of $1.5 million and is one of the largest homes in the Shadyside neighborhood of Pittsburgh.^[14] As of March 2009, the property was listed for sale at $2.5 million; it formerly enclosed an extensive collection of antiques, Oriental rugs, and art during Wuerl's residency.^[15] The property was sold to an anonymous private trust for over $2 million.^[16]

Archbishop of Washington[link]

Wuerl was installed as Archbishop of Washington on June 22, 2006,^[6] at the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception and received the pallium from Pope Benedict XVI on June 29, 2006.

In April 2008, Wuerl, as Archbishop of Washington, hosted the apostolic visit of Pope Benedict XVI to the District of Columbia, which included a visit to the White House, the celebration of Vespers at the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception, Mass at the new Nationals Park, and an address at The Catholic University of America.

Wuerl has been chairman of the board of directors at the National Catholic Educational Association since December 12, 2005.^[17][18] He is also chancellor at the Catholic University of America. In September 2010, Wuerl was appointed by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith delegate in the United States to facilitate the implementation of the Apostolic Constitution Anglicanorum Coetibus issued Pope Benedict XIV in November 2009 to provide for those Anglican faithful who desire to enter into the full communion of the Catholic Church in a corporate manner. He also heads the U.S. bishops’ ad hoc committee created for such implementation. Other members of the ad hoc committee are Bishop Kevin William Vann of Fort Worth, Texas, and Bishop Robert Joseph McManus of Worcester, Massachusetts. The committee will be assisted by Father Scott Hurd.^[19]

Commitment to priestly formation[link]

From 1994 until 2003, as Bishop of Pittsburgh, Wuerl served as a member of the board of governors of the Pontifical North American College in Rome (Chairman, 1998–1999), representing the Pennsylvania-New Jersey Region (Region III) of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. In 2008, as Archbishop of Washington he was again elected to the college's board of governors, this time representing the Washington DC-Delaware-Maryland-Virginia-West Virginia region of the conference (Region IV).

Elevation to College of Cardinals[link]

Styles of Donald William Wuerl
Reference style	His Eminence
Spoken style	Your Eminence
Informal style	Cardinal
See	Washington

On November 20, 2010, Pope Benedict XVI elevated Wuerl to the College of Cardinals in a public consistory held at Saint Peter's Basilica in Vatican City, Rome. He was created Cardinal-Priest of S. Pietro in Vincoli, (Saint Peter in Chains), in Rome. In December 2010, Wuerl was appointed a member of the Congregation for the Clergy and the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity.^{[citation needed]}

On October 24, 2011, Pope Benedict XVI named Wuerl to be the Relator-General of the 2012 World Synod of Bishops meeting on the New Evangelization.^[20]

On December 10, 2011, he was appointed a member of the Pontifical Council for Culture for a five year renewable term.^[21]

On 21 April 2012 Cardinal Wuerl was appointed a member of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

Public positions on moral and political issues[link]

President George W. Bush and Laura Bush welcome outgoing Archbishop of Washington Theodore Edgar McCarrick, left, the incoming Archbishop of Washington, Donald W. Wuerl, far right, and papal nuncio Pietro Sambi to the White House

Clergy Abuse[link]

According to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Wuerl has "a national reputation for zero tolerance of priests who molest minors." ^[22]

Wuerl has been a strong advocate within the Catholic hierarchy for confronting sexual abuse more directly. In September of 1988 when he was serving as Bishop of Pittsburgh, he accepted a dinner invitation from a family suing the diocese for sexual abuse by a priest. Although the diocese's lawyers had discouraged Wuerl from attending the dinner, Wuerl became convinced that sexual abuse was a problem in his diocese. Wuerl settled the lawsuit with the family, and the priest involved was laicized and sent to prison. Wuerl told his staff that in cases of alleged sexual abuse, the first concern should be for the victim, the second concern should be for the victim's family, and only third should clergy consider the reputation of the Church. ^[23]

In the years that followed, Wuerl investigated every priest in his diocese accused of sexual misconduct, and removed several. On one occasion, Wuerl successfully fought to laicize a priest who the Vatican initially had protected. ^[24]

In 2010, Wuerl argued that the Church has made progress in confronting abusers. He told Fox News Sunday that "we have succeeded in guaranteeing that if a priest is accused, and there is a credible allegation, he is simply removed from the ministry. That is reported to the authorities, and we begin to try to heal whatever was damaged in that abuse." ^[25]

Religion and Politics[link]

In cases where Church doctrine clashes with government policies, Wuerl has a reputation as a theological conservative, but not an authoritarian. Wuerl supports serving pro-choice Catholic politicians communion in most cases, once saying, "Our primary job is to teach and try to convince people. The tradition in our country has not been in the direction of refusing Communion, and I think it's served us well."^[26]

In 2009, the D.C. City Council proposed and ultimately passed a same-sex marriage bill. In November 2009, Wuerl signed an ecumenical statement, known as the Manhattan Declaration, calling on evangelicals, Catholics and Orthodox not to comply with rules and laws permitting abortion, same-sex marriage and other matters that go against their religious consciences.^[27] The Catholic Church teaches that marriage is between a man and a woman and that the extension of the civil definition of marriage to same-sex couples undermines the common good of society as a whole.^[28] In the debate on the D.C. same-sex marriage bill, the Archdiocese of Washington advocated for religious liberty provisions that would protect the Church's ability to provide social services (i.e. adoption) in accordance with Catholic teaching on marriage.^[29] After the Washington Post characterized the archdiocese as giving an "ultimatum" to the city,^[30] Wuerl clarified the Church's position in a letter to the Post, stating there was "no threat or ultimatum to end services, just a simple recognition that the new requirements by the city for religious organizations to recognize same-sex marriages in their policies could restrict our ability to provide the same level of services as we do now."^[31] In December 2009, on the day of the bill's passage, same-sex marriage advocates still claimed that Wuerl had "refused to alter his official position" to reduce social services in the archdiocese.^[32] On the same day the archdiocese, though expressing its view that the bill did not adequately protect religious liberty, nonetheless affirmed its commitment to serving the needs of the poor and its hope for "working in partnership with the District of Columbia consistent with the mission of the Catholic Church."^[33] However, reflecting the requirements of the newly-enacted law upon adoption services in the District of Columbia, Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Washington was forced to end its foster care and public adoption program because it could not license same-sex couples for the program.^[34]

Criticism with Regard to the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite[link]

Some traditionalist Catholics criticized a letter that Wuerl issued in response to Summorum Pontificum. The letter stated that "his permission must be received prior to making any permanent commitments by a parish for the public celebration, on a regular basis, of the 1962 form of the Roman liturgy as an extraordinary form of the Roman Rite." Wuerl argued in his letter that this restriction is in accord with Article 5 of Summorum Pontificum, which states that "public or regularly scheduled Masses be offered under the guidance of the bishop in accordance with canon 392, avoiding discord and favoring the unity of the whole Church."^[35]

The full text of Article 5, Section 1 of Summorum Pontificum is as follows. It contains both the admonition to pastors to establish an extraordinary form when there is a stable group of faithful, and the provision that the pastor act under the guidance of his bishop in the manner Wuerl attempts to establish in the letter mentioned above:

Art. 5. § 1 : In parishes, where there is a stable group of faithful who adhere to the earlier liturgical tradition, the pastor should willingly accept their requests to celebrate the Mass according to the rite of the Roman Missal published in 1962, and ensure that the welfare of these faithful harmonises with the ordinary pastoral care of the parish, under the guidance of the bishop in accordance with canon 392, avoiding discord and favouring the unity of the whole Church.

In part to further clarify the interaction of Can. 392 and Article 5 of Summorum Pontificum, the Holy See issued "Universae Ecclesiae" on April 30, 2011. The relevant paragraphs of that document say:

13. Diocesan Bishops, according to Canon Law, are to monitor liturgical matters in order to guarantee the common good and to ensure that everything is proceeding in peace and serenity in their Dioceses, always in agreement with the mens of the Holy Father clearly expressed by the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum. In cases of controversy or well-founded doubt about the celebration in the forma extraordinaria, the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei will adjudicate.

14. It is the task of the Diocesan Bishop to undertake all necessary measures to ensure respect for the forma extraordinaria of the Roman Rite, according to the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum.''

A footnote (#6) in paragraph 13 seeks to clarify what "the mens of the Holy Father" refers to in this case. It directs the reader to the letter to bishops which accompanies Summorum Pontificum. The part of that letter which is germane to Can. 392 is the following:

In conclusion, dear Brothers, I very much wish to stress that these new norms do not in any way lessen your own authority and responsibility, either for the liturgy or for the pastoral care of your faithful. Each Bishop, in fact, is the moderator of the liturgy in his own Diocese (cf. Sacrosanctum Concilium, 22: “Sacrae Liturgiae moderatio ab Ecclesiae auctoritate unice pendet quae quidem est apud Apostolicam Sedem et, ad normam iuris, apud Episcopum”).

Nothing is taken away, then, from the authority of the Bishop, whose role remains that of being watchful that all is done in peace and serenity. Should some problem arise which the parish priest cannot resolve, the local Ordinary will always be able to intervene, in full harmony, however, with all that has been laid down by the new norms of the Motu Proprio.''

Bibliography[link]

• The Forty Martyrs: New Saints of England and Wales, (Huntington: Our Sunday Visitor, 1971)
• Fathers of the Church, (Huntington: Our Sunday Visitor, 1975)
• The Catholic Priesthood Today, (Chicago: Franciscan Herald Press, 1976)
• The Teaching of Christ: A Catholic Catechism for Adults, (Huntington: Our Sunday Visitor, 1976)
• A Visit to the Vatican: For Young People, (Boston: St. Paul Editions, 1981)
• The Gift of Faith: A Question and Answer Version of The Teaching of Christ, (Huntington: Our Sunday Visitor, 2001)
• The Catholic Way: Faith for Living Today, (New York: Doubleday, 2001)
• The Sacraments: A Continuing Encounter with Christ, (Our Sunday Visitor, 2010)
• The Mass: The Glory, The Mystery, The Tradition, (New York: Doubleday, 2011)
• The Gift of Blessed John Paul II, (Frederick, MD: The Word Among Us Press, 2011)
• Seek First the Kingdom: Challenging the Culture by Living Our Faith, (Huntington: Our Sunday Visitor, 2011)

Pastoral letters as Archbishop of Washington[link]

• "Disciples of the Lord: Sharing the Vision", August 23, 2010
• "God's Mercy and Loving Presence", January 3, 2010
• "Belonging to God's Family", January 25, 2009
• "Catholic Education: Looking to the Future with Confidence", September 14, 2008
• "Reflections on God's Mercy And Our Forgiveness", January 1, 2008
• "God's Mercy and the Sacrament of Penance", January 8, 2007

References[link]

Sources[link]

• Glenn, Francis A. (1993), Shepherds of the Faith 1843-1993: A Brief History of the Bishops of the Catholic Diocese of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh: Catholic Diocese of Pittsburgh, ISBN none 

External links[link]

• Catholic Hierarchy website
• Roman Catholic Diocese of Pittsburgh History of Bishops webpage
• Criticism of Archbishop Donald Wuerl
• Schools Controversy in Archdiocese of Washington

Episcopal succession[link]

Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Donald Wuerl

Narendra Modi નરેન્દ્ર મોદી
Chief Minister of Gujarat
Incumbent
Assumed office 7 October 2001
Governor	Dr. Kamla Beniwal
Preceded by	Keshubhai Patel
Constituency	Maninagar
Personal details
Born	(1950-09-17) 17 September 1950 (age 61) Vadnagar, Gujarat, India
Political party	Bharatiya Janata Party
Residence	Gandhinagar, Gujarat, India
Alma mater	Gujarat University[1]
Religion	Hinduism
Website	Narendra Modi
As of 9 March, 2009 Source: Government of Gujarat

Narendra Damodardas Modi (Gujarati: નરેન્દ્ર મોદી; born 17 September 1950^[1]) is the current Chief Minister of the Indian state of Gujarat. Born in a middle class family in Vadnagar, he was the third of six children born to Damodardas Mulchand Modi and his wife Heeraben.^[2] He has been a member of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) since childhood also having interest in politics since adolescence. He holds a master's degree in political science. In 1998, he was chosen by L. K. Advani, the leader of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), to direct the election campaign in Gujarat as well as Himachal Pradesh.

He became Chief Minister of Gujarat in October 2001, promoted to the office at a time when his predecessor Keshubhai Patel had resigned, following the defeat of BJP in the by-elections. His tenure as chief minister of Gujarat began on 7 October 2001, and he is the longest serving Chief Minister of the state of Gujarat.^[3] In July 2007 he became the longest serving Chief Minister in Gujarat's history when he had been in power for 2063 days continuously.^[4] He was elected again for a third term^[5] on 23 December 2007 in the state elections, which he had cast as a "referendum on his rule".^[6][7]

Personal life[link]

Modi was born in a middle class family in Vadnagar in Mehsana district of what was then Bombay State, India.^[8] During the Indo-Pak war in the mid sixties, even as a young boy, he volunteered to serve the soldiers in transit at railway stations.^[9] As a young man, he joined the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad, a student organisation and was involved in the anti-corruption Nav Nirmāṇ ("Reconstruction") Movement. After working as a full time organiser for the organisation, he was later nominated as its representative in the Bharatiya Janata Party.^[10] As a teenager Modi used to run a tea stall with his brother.^[11] Modi completed his schooling in Vadnagar. He earned a masters degree in political science from Gujarat University.^[12]

Early activism and politics[link]

Modi was a pracharak (campaigner) in the RSS during his university years.^[12][13] He took up the challenging task of energising the party cadres in right earnest. In partnership with Shankersinh Vaghela, Modi set about creating a strong cadre base in Gujarat. In the initial period, Vaghela was seen as a mass leader, while Modi was recognised as a master strategist.

The party started gaining political mileage and formed a coalition government at the centre in April 1990. This partnership fell apart within a few months, but the BJP came to power with a two-thirds majority on its own in Gujarat in 1995. During this period, Modi was entrusted with the responsibility of organising two crucial national events, the Somnath to Ayodhya Rath Yatra (a political rally through India on a converted Toyota van) of L.K. Advani and a similar march from Kanyakumari (the southernmost part of India) to Kashmir in the North. After the exit of Shankarsingh Vaghela from the BJP, Keshubhai Patel was made Chief Minister while Narendra Modi was sent to New Delhi as a General Secretary of the Party.

In 1995, Modi was appointed the National Secretary of the party and given the charge of five major states in India. In 1998, he was promoted as the General Secretary (Organization), a post he held until October 2001. In 2001, Narendra Modi was chosen by the party to be the Chief Minister of Gujarat after the removal of chief minister Keshubhai Patel.

Tenure as Chief Minister of Gujarat[link]

Personality[link]

Modi is known for leading a frugal lifestyle. He has a personal staff of just three. He is known to be a workaholic Chief Minister and an introvert.^[14] He ordered the demolition of many Hindu temples that were built without proper government sanction which earned him the ire of VHP^[11] He is a crowd puller as a speaker. Modi has also tried to turn his image from an Hindu Nationalist politician to an image of able administrator. He wears business suits and is improving his command over the English language.^[15]

Awards and recognitions[link]

Modi was awarded Gujarat Ratna by Shri Poona Gujarati Bandhu Samaj at Ganesh Kala Krida Manch on celebration of centenary year.^[16]

Development of Gujarat[link]

As a Chief Minister, Modi started various 'yojanas' or plans. This includes:

• Panchamrut Yojana,^[17][18][19] a five-pronged strategy for an integrated development of the state,
• Sujalam Sufalam, a scheme to create a grid of water resources in Gujarat in an innovative step towards water conservation and its appropriate utilisation.
• Krishi Mahotsav – agricultural research labs for the land
• Chiranjeevi Yojana – To reduce infant mortality rate
• Matru Vandana – Providing preventive and curative services under the Reproductive and Child Health Programme
• Beti Bachao – Campaign against female infanticide to improve sex ratio
• Jyotigram Yojana – Provide electricity to every village
• Karmayogi Abhiyan – To educate and train government employees
• Kanya Kelavani Yojana – To encourage female literacy and education
• Balbhog Yojana – Midday meal scheme for students to encourage school attendance from poor backgrounds.^[20]

Vibrant Gujarat[link]

Vibrant Gujarat is a biennial Global Investors' Summit held by the Government of Gujarat in Gujarat, India. The event is aimed at bringing together business leaders, investors, corporations, thought leaders, policy and opinion makers; the summit is advertised as a platform to understand and explore business opportunities in the State of Gujarat. the event has been held continuously since 2003.

Gujarat earthquake[link]

The biggest challenge which he had to face when he took over as the Chief Minister, was the reconstruction and rehabilitation of the areas affected by the massive Gujarat Earthquake of January 2001.

Gujarat violence[link]

On 27 February 2002, a train was burned by a Muslim mob in the town of Godhra leading to 59 deaths, most of them Hindu pilgrims and activists returning from the holy city of Ayodhya.^[21] Riots broke out in the state after it was suspected to be caused by Muslims, leading to 1180 deaths, many of them Muslims. Modi administration was accused of inaction over the riots and for encouraging them.^[15] As an aftermath of the riots, there were calls for Modi to resign from his position as chief minister of Gujarat. The opposition parties stalled the national parliament over the issue. Even Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) and Telugu Desam Party (TDP), allies of the BJP, asked for Modi's resignation.^[22][23] Modi submitted his resignation to the Governor and recommended the dissolution of the 10th Gujarat Legislative Assembly.^[24][25] In the following state re-elections the BJP, led by Modi, won 127 seats in the 182-member assembly.

In April 2009, the Supreme Court of India appointed a special team of investigators to look into the role Modi had played in the alleged anti-Muslim conspiracy.^[15] The team was appointed in response to the complaint of zakia Jafri, the widow of ex-Congress MP Ehsan Jafri, who was murdered in the riots.^[26] In December 2010, a Supreme Court-appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT) in its report to the Supreme Court seeking answers pertaining to the Ehsan Jafri case, submitted that they had found no evidence against Narendra Modi.^[27]

However in February 2011, the Times of India reported that a confidential report from the SIT indicted Modi on several counts of alleged complicity in the Gujarat riots of 2002.^[28] Most other sources have noted that the SIT report does not indict Modi for the riots due to lack of evidence.^[29][30] The Indian Express too said the report did not find any Modi involvement in the violence, though it did accuse him of watering down the seriousness of the situation.^[31] According to the Hindu, the report not only found that Modi tried to water down the seriousness of the situation, but Modi also implicitly justified the killings of Muslims, and failed to condemn the attacks on them.^[32] The Bharatiya Janata Party demanded an investigation into the publication of the report, claiming the leak was politically motivated.^[33]

The apex court refused to pass any order on the case and referred it to the Ahmedabad magistrate for a decision.^[34] In April 2012, a Special Investigation Team found absolved Modi of any involvement in the Gulberg massacre, arguably the worst episode of the riots.^[35]. On 7 May 2012, a Supreme Court-appointed amicus curiae, Raju Ramachandran observed that Modi can be prosecuted under sections 153 A (1) (a) & (b), 153 B (1), 166 and 505 (2) of the Indian Penal Code for promoting enmity among different groups during the 2002 Gujarat riots.^[36]. However the amicus report has been criticised by the Special Investigation Team for relying heavily on the testimony of a perjurer^[37].

2007 elections[link]

Modi made a speech at Mangrol in which he justified the alleged fake encounter of Sohrabuddin Sheikh, During the election campaign In response to Sonia Gandhi's speech calling him a "merchant of death",^[38] and referred to Sohrabuddin's killing. For this speech the Election Commission of India, a constitutional body governing election proceedings in India, cautioned Modi as it considered it as indulging in an activity which may aggravate existing differences between different communities.^[39] Modi won the election and continued his post as the Chief Minister Of Gujarat, he won with majority of votes of 122 seats out of 182 total assembly seats.^[40]

Conflicts with Governor Kamla Beniwal[link]

On 25 August 2011 Gujarat Governor Kamla Beniwal appointed Justice R A Mehta to the post of Lokyukta of Gujarat, a critical anti-corruption post that had been lying vacant since 2003. Justice R A Mehta was recommended for the post by the Chief Justice of the Gujarat High Court in June. Since Governor Beniwal had made this decision without consulting and getting the approval of the chief minister and his council of ministers, the action angered Narendra Modi and his BJP party.^[41]

This marked the beginning of a strained relationship between Modi and the Governor. On 25 September 2011, Narendra Modi accused the Governor of running a parallel government in the state supported by the Congress. He demanded that she be recalled back.^[42] He also later accused her of delaying the progress of bills by not passing them.

The decision of the governor in the appointment of R A Mehta was challenged in the high court by the Modi government. The two member high court bench gave a split verdict on 10 October 2011. Later, a third member upheld the governor's decision in January 2012.^[43]

Foreign visits[link]

As the Chief Minister of the Gujarat State, to attract foreign investment in the state, Narendra Modi has made visits to foreign countries, including China and Singapore.

Narendra Modi made his first China visit in 2007 to invite investors Vibrant Gujarat Global Investor Summit,^[44] and second visit in November 2011. One month after the second visit to China, the Chinese Government released 13 Diamond traders from India jailed by the Shenzhen Customs, which the Chief Minister described as the consequece of his diplomatic efforts and statesmanship.^[45]

In 2005 Narendra Modi was denied of diplomatic visa to the United States, in addition to this visa denial, he was also revoked from his already granted B-1/B-2 visa.^[46]

Sadbhavna Mission[link]

In the late 2011-early 2012 Narandra Modi practised a series of fasts in the name of Sadbhavna Mission. The mission started on 17 September 2011 in Ahmedabad with 3 day fast with a view to strengthen the atmosphere of peace, unity and harmony in the state. He observed total 36 fasts in 26 districts, 8 cities including Ahmedabad.^[47]

Views and opinions[link]

Modi's position on terrorism[link]

On 18 July 2006 Modi delivered a speech criticising Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh "for his reluctance to revive anti-terror legislations" like the Prevention of Terrorism Act. He asked the Centre to empower states to invoke tougher laws in the wake of the blasts in Mumbai.^[48] Quoting Modi:

Narendra Modi has frequently commented that if the BJP came to power at the Centre, they will honour the 2004 Supreme Court judgement to hang Afzal Guru.^[49] Afzal was convicted of terrorism in the 2001 Indian Parliament attack in 2004 by the Supreme Court of India and is in Tihar Jail.^[50]

On account of the November 2008 Mumbai attacks, on Thursday 27 November, Narendra Modi held a meeting to discuss waterfront security along the coastline.^[51] The meeting decided to ask the Central government to urgently sanction the following:

• Increase the number of police stations along the coast to 50 (from 10)
• Increase the number of police to 1500 from 250
• 30 modern high-speed surveillance boats.

The 30 coastal boats, under construction at Goa's shipbuilding yard, will have the capacity to run at the speed of 25 nautical miles per hour. These are being manufactured under the Centre's Rs 58-crore grant for coastal security.^[51]

Views on criticism of Modi's governance[link]

In 2003, when Narendra Modi was asked about the conflict of his dreams for Gujarat's future with international criticism of his past activities, Modi said,^[52]

Modi's decision to link Gujarat's violence with the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the US drew criticism from some observers, who contrasted it with the then Deputy Prime Minister L K Advani's unpleasant apology for Gujarat in London a year ago.^[52] Modi responded to this criticism by The Guardian,^[52]

See also[link]

• Chief Minister
• Gujarat
• Bhartiya Janata Party

References[link]