Feature Article

Should a pope resign?

Being elected head of the Catholic Church has always been considered a life-long appointment. As John Paul II remains in hospital, some cardinals are in a quandary: has the moment come for him to step down?

?THE Pope is never sick until he?s dead.? That sardonic old Roman adage reveals more than mere scepticism over official reports of a Pope?s health. It also illustrates a general perplexity throughout the Church about what is to be done if ? by infirmity, insanity or just old age ? the Bishop of Rome can no longer exercise his ministry of universal church governance.

While canon law provides for a pope?s voluntary retirement (although only very few have actually chosen this option), there is no provision whatsoever for his removal. The job is for life. So, to quote another bawdy saying from the irreverent Roman vox populi: ?Better a dead pope than a sick one?.

In former times when rapid global communications were still unheard of, concerns about a pope?s wellbeing were almost exclusively a matter for the Roman Curia. But in this cyber-age of non-stop news bulletins, it has become increasingly difficult ? even for the Vatican ? to keep news of a pope?s poor health out of public view.

This has tested the patience and imagination of those who, over the past two decades, have cleverly harnessed the power of the mass media to spread the message and enhance the image of the current office holder ? Pope John Paul II. Just as they were treated to photos of the Polish pontiff privately forgiving Mehmet Ali Agca, the man who tried to kill him in 1981, journalists and camera crews continue to expect the same kind of openness concerning the Pope?s deteriorating physical condition.

This became particularly apparent in the past week in Rome when hundreds of journalists and camera crews descended on the city after news broke that John Paul had been taken to hospital after developing breathing problems as a result of a bout of flu. A scrum of reporters surrounded the Gemelli hospital, where the Pope was treated, broadcasting to the world.

?I cannot be feeding your networks information 24 hours a day,? snapped the papal spokesman, Dr Joaqu?n Navarro-Valls, on the fifth day of the Pope?s most recent stay in hospital.

Until recently most people in the Vatican believed that the spokesman ? and the Pope himself ? were giving journalists too much information, not too little. And it was considered disrespectful to openly discuss the once vigorous Pope?s alarmingly failing health. So the topic was carefully avoided. While some people have complained that the Church ? and the Pope ? should stay out of people?s bedrooms, now you have the Vatican complaining that people should stay out the Pope?s sick room.

However, it has become obvious that John Paul is no longer able to fulfil basic physical tasks such as walking and talking. Embarrassing as it is to admit, this has begun to raise concerns that the Pope?s steady decline will eventually make it impossible ? physically and mentally ? for him to continue to lead the one billion-member Catholic Church.

Church law provides only one solution: that the Pope voluntarily resigns. Canon 322, paragraph 2 says that in order for a resignation to be valid the Pope must make it freely ?and that it be duly manifested, but not that it be accepted by anyone?. The retirement clause was put into the 1983 revision of Canon Law during the present pontificate. But John Paul II has given no indication that he intends to invoke it.

?There is no place in the Church for an emeritus Pope,? he said a few years ago. He has repeated on several occasions that he will soldier on as pontiff ?for as long as God wishes?. And to make the point even more forcefully ? if poetically ? he once mused: ?Did Jesus come down from the Cross??

The vast majority of church leaders have been very careful not to speak of the pope?s retirement, until recently. Those who have ? cardinals Ratzinger, Rodriguez, Pompedda, Lehmann, Danneels, and now Sodano ? have been criticised and, in at least one or two cases, pressed by their confr?res to ?clarify? their comments.

The cardinals ? those who elect a pope ? are not entirely of the same mind on this question. ?If he does then resign?, Cardinal Jorge Mej?a says, ?then there will be those who will accuse us of forcing him out.? The 82-year-old Argentine was one of the first cardinals to bring up the topic of resignation several years ago, suggesting that the Pope would probably have to stand down if he could no longer speak. While a pope can communicate his teaching through documents and encyclicals, papal utterances have immense power. Think of the importance to people of papal audiences, and the balcony appearances where a pope will speak ?urbi et orbi? ? to the city and the world.

But the Pope?s Secretary of State ? Cardinal Angelo Sodano ? says John Paul could continue to govern the Church even if he lost his speaking faculty. Sodano is the most recent official to mention the possibility of a papal renunciation, but says the matter must be left to John Paul alone. ?He knows what he must do,? the cardinal says.

It has long been rumoured in the Vatican that the Pope has already made arrangements in the event of his becoming incapacitated. A famous ?resignation letter? is said to contain instructions that the Pope should be relieved of his duties if he cannot fulfil them. ?I have the impression that the Pope has written such a letter,? Cardinal Mej?a says. He bases that on a conversation that he and some other officials had with John Paul some time ago. ?He told a group of us that he found a letter ? he did not say where ? that was written by Paul VI saying that, if by chance he were to become mentally or physically incapacitated, the cardinals should consider the Apostolic See vacant and proceed to the Conclave.? Mejia?s conclusion is that this would be a matter of ?normal prudence?.

Canon lawyers, however, are not sure what to make of a papal resignation ? especially given the fact that the Pope has no superior on earth to whom he could tender it. Presumably, he would just step aside, leaving the office vacant, and allowing for a Conclave. (Where a retired pope would go is anybody?s guess, although in the case of John Paul a return to his beloved Poland might be a possibility.)

But the more troubling question is what would happen if the Pope were to lapse into a coma or lose his mind. There is simply nothing in Canon Law that adequately deals with this type of situation. ?When the Roman See is vacant or entirely impeded nothing is to be innovated in the governance of the universal Church; however, special laws enacted for these circumstances are to be enacted? (Canon 335). To this date ? unless they are being kept secret ? no such ?special laws? exist.

A canon lawyer who works in the Roman Curia tells me that canonists in the Middle Ages fiercely debated such scenarios. A common opinion of the time, he says, was that an insane pope would be treated exactly in the same manner as a heretical one. Since heretics are ?outside the Church?, the Apostolic See would de facto be vacant. So a pope who was either insane or heretical would have ?implicitly abdicated? the chair of Peter. But history shows that there is rarely unanimity when judging when ?implicit abdication? has taken place.

John Paul II is not the first pope to have serious medical problems. And while most of the popes in the past two centuries have died punctually, there are cases in history where a sick pontiff lingered for years. Clement XII is a prime example. He was already 79 years old and mostly bed-ridden when the cardinals elected him in 1730. By 1736, he had completely lost his eyesight and by 1738 had lost his memory, too, yet he lived and reigned, more or less gloriously, until 1740!

So what happens when a pope is laid up?

?The machine goes on,? says Cardinal Mejia. ?A week or 10 days ? even a month ? is not a problem.? However, he says an extended period with an incapacitated pope would demand that some type of ?decision? be taken. This is perhaps more of a perceptual problem than an actual one, due in large measure to the way John Paul II has ?stylised? the papacy. He has emerged as the Catholic Church?s principal ?icon? and his gestures have become just as significant as his documents. Furthermore, he has never been comfortable being a ?palace pope?, but has preferred to be out on the road and among the crowds. In the last few years, however, the Pope has had to content himself with entertaining at home in the Vatican.

It seems that as long as Pope John Paul II is able to continue making even cameo appearances and engage in some sort of communication with others, that decision will be put off. But as he weakens, the inner circle around him becomes tighter and decisions greater than mere ?daily business? are increasingly being made by a very small number of people.

Most people agree that the four men who have control are Cardinal Sodano; Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith; Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, prefect of the Congregation for Bishops; and Cardinal Camillo Ruini, the Pope?s vicar for the diocese of Rome. Sodano, 78, has been the ?number two? since 1991. If the Pope has indeed written a conditional resignation letter, it is most likely in the Secretary of State?s keeping. Ratzinger, who will soon be 78 as well, is the longest-serving head of a Vatican office. He has served as the Church?s ?guardian of orthodoxy? since 1981. Re, 71, who has spent most of his priestly life in the Secretariat of State, is one of the most powerful behind-the-scenes men in the Roman Curia. And Ruini, 74, has been the Pope?s eyes and ears for the Church in Italy since 1985 and his vicar for Rome since 1991.

However, the real ?power behind the throne? is John Paul?s personal secretary, Archbishop Stanislaw Dziwisz, who is nearly 66. He has been with Karol Wojtyla since he was the Archbishop of Krakow, and has increasingly become the interpreter of the Pope?s wishes. It is inconceivable that any decisions will be taken regarding John Paul?s future without his consent and active participation.

Robert Mickens writes from Rome for The Tablet.