Feb 102011
 

by Anura Guruge

This is to complement the February 10, 2011 posting as to when the cardinals electors created by Benedict XVI might become the majority.

Ages of the Cardinals per Anura Guruge

  12 Responses to “Ages Of The Cardinals, Per The Three Popes That Created Them”

  1. Brilliant, thank YOU.
    This is now an ‘old’ post, I wonder whether enough people might see it.
    Bit of a set back today. Very high winds all across the East. We lost power for 12 hours. Yes, I have two generators, and I ran them. Yes, I could have used my computers and Internet, but I have discovered that the power from the generators is very dirty. Though I have UPCs I am still a bit leery of subjecting them to such dirty. The frequency of the generators is such that the times on our digital clocks fluctuate. So I had a rare 12 hour break from work. Wife and kids … and my wife’s sister wh was here thought it was funny.
    I might think about making this a stand-alone post next week.
    THANK YOU.
    Did the books arrive?
    Cheers.

  2. Feb. 21, 2001 didn’t a cardinal die that day … also? I need to check. I recall seeing recently … Do you recall.
    What I recall seeing was that it was a busy day …. consistory … one cardinal turned 80 … another died … 42 created … 2 more named. Is that about right? Hope to work on this tomorrow.
    Your list is wonderful. I will make it a stand-alone post next week. THANK YOU.

  3. I have said this before … but in light of your comments … especially the 2nd paragraph … it is worth saying this again.
    My feeling … just my own opinion (and I have found no evidence to support this) … is that Paul VI did NOT intend the over-80 cut-off to be a permanent feature. It was TACTICAL. To weed out the old, traditional, set-in-the-mud cardinals. I think, that his hope was that once a new pope … or even two … had had a chance to ‘renew’ the College with new blood … that they would remove the over-80 ruling.
    This subject got discussed around Oct-Nov. last year … with Father Anthony … who was in Rome during Paul VI’s tenure and even celebrated a Mass with him.
    I have discovered that the Pope was under heavy stress with allegations of homosexual misconduct in the Vatican. I think this pressure made Paul VI not as ‘rational’ as he had been in his early days. He didn’t impose a cap on the size of the College. he should have. He also had the 80 cut-off as of the DAY of the conclave. But, the cardinals had the leeway to alter the start day by up to 5 days. As you know John Paul II in UDG changed that. This alone shows me that he was not thinking as he had done previously. Also in his conclave protocols there is the most INANE procedure about duplicate votes. It is not workable and makes no sense. If they discover dulicate votes the ballot is not disqualified — as it should. Again the signs of a person not thinking as clearly as one hopes. This is why I think the whole over-80/size of the College was mishandled by the pope — BUT he was always thinking … tactical, tactical, short-term …. a future pope will fix it. They have yet to.
    Thank you.

  4. Yes,Cardinal Lebrun Moratinos died and Cardinal Javierre Ortas turned 80 the day of the 2001 consistory.It was too late to allocate the titular church of Cardinal Lebrun Moratinos to a new Cardinal.

    I think there are about 300 churches in Rome…is that the theoretical limit to the size of the College?
    Life expectancy does seem to be tying the hands of any prospective Pope who might think Sixtus V had a better idea when it came to membership limits.

  5. Of late I do NOT think so. They needed to be historic churches, which in Europe (as opposed to New York) would mean at least 1,000 years old. But, I am beginning to think that any church or chapel, in a 35 mile radius of Rome will do. For a start, I am SURE the pope can make the Sistine a titular and give the title to a really special cardinal.
    I did the sums here, and YOUR e-mail was right. There are 5 titles AVAILABLE and 7 deaconries. But, the pope can create more.
    I am reproducing this from YOUR e-mail, since it will be useful to have. I trust that you got it right. Gabriel Chow at gcatholic.com keeps a fairly good list. He has six (6).
    Your 5 (per your e-mail): S. Callisto(1456? or 1517), S. Gioacchino ai Prati di Castello(1960), S. Patrizio(1965), Nostra Signora di Guadalupe a Monte Mario(1969) & S. Felice a Cantalice a Centocelle(1969).
    Could you please check. I am FLAT OUT today. Gabriel is a friend. I can check with him … IF you find a discrepancy. He will also fix things.
    *******
    So how come YOU are maintaining this SILENCE about Sepe precedence. I will grant that YOU are in the TOP 15 in the known Universe when it comes to Cardinal knowledge. So GO for it.
    Thanks. I have to run. Cheers.

  6. Dear Father,
    I am aghast that you haven’t got the books. Two separate, LARGE packets. Lets hope … early this week. In the last few years the US Postal Service has NOT let me down. I send and receive a LOT of books. I belong to a book swap club where we exchange books via mail. Typically send and receive one in each direction every week. Yes, all in the US … no problems. I have sent books to UK. No problem. And YES, I can make a joke that the UK is different then Austria, but I won’t. Let us keep our fingers crossed (though I am not sure whether priests are allowed to do that).
    *******
    I have also been THINKING whether it was 42 or 44. I did some looking and some thinking. We got 44 new cardinals, BUT only 42 were CREATED on that day. Do you interpret otherwise?
    *******
    I will go back and check Dear Salvador chronology. I THOUGHT he had it as 184 down to 183 after the death. One of my tasks for the day.
    *******
    Paul VI and over-80.
    Something else he didn’t specify. He never, after his edict (possibly even before), never created over-80 cardinals. JP II did — by the dozen. Did P 6 intend to say … ‘only create cardinals younger than 80’?
    Here is something that we can SPECULATE.
    I am 99.6% sure that P 6, unless he got a briefing from The Boss (though I think that that is unlikely because the BOSS doesn’t seem to be into that kind of stuff), never envisaged a non-conventional BUT conservative, possibly once-married, definitely heterosexual Polish pope taking his place within 2 months of his death. Though he created Wojtyla not sure how much one-on-one interactions he had with Polish cardinal. We do know that Wojtyla was a frequent visitor to Italy, but usually to socilaize with his like minded buddies. It is even said that he was in Italy, 10 days prior to JP I’s unfortunate demise. So my speculation. Did P 6 have chats with HIS Italian cardinals as to how he expected the over-80 rule to play out. Possible. So JP I may have had some plans. But, JP II was not part of that circle and IF TOLD … probably didn’t care BECAUSE he saw a POLITICAL opportunity in the ruling … he could make MORE cardinals … creating a two-tier College.
    Must run. Many thanks. All the best.

  7. Dear Father,
    A technical question re. Marian Jaworski & Jānis Pujats the two In pectore.
    As far as I know only YOU, Louis and Marko can even TRY to answer this.
    So Jaworski & Pujats were NAMED on January 28, 2001 … 3 weeks AHEAD of the consistory.
    OK. Let us rewrite history. A conclave NEEDED to be held on February 16, 2001 to elect a NEW pope. [So the Feb. 21, 2001 consistory never happened.]
    Could Marian Jaworski & Jānis Pujats have participated?
    Yes, Louis it would have generated MUCH discussion at one or more general, pre-conclave congregations. [[ smile ]]
    So … the answer is …
    Thanks. Cheers.

  8. The discrepancy between our lists of vacant titles relates to the two S. Atanasios which have both been recently created and never had cardinals at the same time.One title or two?…does anyone have a full list of functioning churches in Rome that can verify that they are two different churches or not?

    The long vacancy in the historic S. Callisto title is also curious,could the church have closed?

  9. The fact that the cardinal receives his hat and title is not important. Pope Clement X was created cardinal by his immediate predecessor, Clement IX, in a consistory held 10 days before the death of the latter. Other cardinals created in the same consistory reeived their hat and title from Clement X, some 20 days after his election. There were often cases when cardinals from France or Hungary never received their hat and title. In many cases they were elderly man not able to travel to Rome.

  10. A had a look at the consistories in the 10th and 20th century. While most of the cardinals created in pectore were published (I am citing Salvador Miranda’s expressions) in come of the following consistories where other cardinals were created as well, there where 3 exceptions in the 19th century where a “special” consistory was made with the sole purpose to publish the cardinals made in pectore.
    1.) three cardinals were created by Pius VII on February 23, 1801. They were published on September 28, 2001. Two of them received their hats on October 1, 1801. The third one received his hat on December 23, 1801. On the latter date all three of them received their titles. The sole purpose of the consistory was the publishing of the three cardinals. Titles and hats later.
    2.) Another five cardinals were created by Pius VII on March 8, 1816 and published on July 22, 1816. no other cardinal was created in addition. Hats and titles were again distributed later.
    3.) On July 11, 1836 a consistory was held by Gregory XVI to publish three cardinals crated on two different dates: one cardinal was created on September 30, 1831 and the other two on June 23, 1834. Hats and titles were received on November 21, 1836.
    There were two additional consistories held by Gregory XVI in 1845 where some cardinals created previously were published and some were received in pectore and never published (Gregory XVI died in 1846; he held on consistory in 1846 as well).
    1.) April 21, 1845. Four cardinals created in three previous consistories were pulished, additional four created in pectore and never published
    2.) November 24, 1845. Two cardinals published, one created in pectore and never published. On of the cardinals published on April 21, 1845 was created on the same sate as those two, but they were published half a year after him.
    This data, which I looked up this morning make me think that a consistory needs to be held in order to publish a cardinal. Although it is probably enough that cardinals residing in Rome are present. How many cardinals were present on February 21, 2011, when six cardinal deacons were promoted to cardinal priests?

  11. 47 yesterday.
    On Jan. 28, 2001, JP II named the two previously in pectore at his Sunday, noon Angelus. I would have to assume that at least a handful of cardinals would have been around.
    Thanks.
    P.S., The US tax date is April 15, provided it does not fall on a weekend or holiday. If so they push it back. This year it is April 18. But, April 15 is THE DAY. I don’t start doing mine till mid-March. Lot of others though, like my relative do it much earlier. Some, not too swift on money matters, pay EXTRA tax to the government throughout the year, then file their return in early January and get a BIG, FAT tax refund — of all the unnecessary tax they paid, and that is at 0%.
    Cheers

  12. I am TOTALLY confused, and I haven’t the time to look into all of this.
    But EXPLAIN this to me: “At this time”, the Holy Father added, “my thoughts turn especially to the people there who are being severely tested by this tragedy. Let us ask God to relieve their suffering and to support all who are involved in the rescue operations. I also ask you to join me in praying for all who have lost their lives”.

    Why do WE have to ASK God? Doesn’t he know? Is it old age? That he, meaning God, like George W. Bush and Hurricane Katherine, did not know that an earthquake struck NZ. Yes, I understand that other than for the highly dubious angels, God does not appear to have any staff working for him … BUT do WE have to really tell him what is happening down here on EARTH? Isn’t he meant to be omnipotent?

    Why is the POPE making such an inane request? Plus how can God relieve their suffering? Isn’t suffering one of the most beautiful aspects of OUR Free Will, ability to suffer at will? Every time there is a small natural disaster people just lose sight of things. This is OUTSIDE the purview of God. God did not cause the quake. God was NOT going to stop the quake. Ergo, God is not going to do anything afterwards either. We need to just get on with it. This is why I get so incensed when people start these:
    “let us PRAY for the people in NZ.” Prayer is going to do anything other than give people a false of satisfaction that they did something and it didn’t cost them a dime. If you want to help the folks in NZ send money to the Red Cross.

 Leave a Reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

Rss Feed Tweeter button Facebook button Technorati button Reddit button Myspace button Linkedin button Webonews button Delicious button Digg button Stumbleupon button Newsvine button