Posted on 04/04/2005 5:37:56 PM PDT by wagglebee
VATICAN CITY – What happens to the mystery cardinal the late Pope John Paul II selected in 2003 but never publicly identified?
Will the world ever find out who was picked?
Vatican watchers wondered Monday whether there was still a way in accordance with Church law for this unidentified "prince of the Church" to take his place among the cardinals and, if he is young enough, vote for the new pope.
When John Paul created new cardinals in 2003, he announced that he was keeping one name secret, or "in pectore," meaning "in the heart." This is a formula that has been used when the pope wants to name a cardinal in a country where the church is oppressed.
Vatican watchers have speculated that the prelate could be from China, where only a state-sanctioned church is recognized.
But Polish Archbishop Stanislaw Dziwisz, 65, John Paul's longtime private secretary who was at his bedside when he died, has also been mentioned as the possible secret cardinal.
The Rev. James Conn, a professor of canon law at the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome, said that if John Paul identified the man in writing in some authenticated document before he died, the man would be a cardinal.
"I think that any means of publishing the name of the cardinal that was previously not revealed, including in some testimonial that was authenticated, would be acceptable," Conn said.
Canon law says only that the pope has to make his name public. But it doesn't say whether that has to be done orally, he said.
Once the name is made public, the cardinal "is bound by the same duties and possesses the same rights" of the other cardinals, including the right to vote for a new pope if he is younger than 80, canon law says.
There are now 117 cardinals eligible to vote in the conclave to elect John Paul's successor.
John Paul has named three other "in pectore" cardinals whose names were later revealed, including Marian Jaworski, archbishop of Lviv, Ukraine, for Catholics who follow the Latin rite, and Janis Pujats of Riga, Latvia.
Both Ukraine and Latvia formerly belonged to the officially atheist Soviet Union.
The third was Ignatius Kung Pin-Mei, an elderly Chinese bishop who spent 30 years in Chinese prisons for defying attempts by China's communist government to control Roman Catholics through the state-run church.
While in prison in 1979, he was named "in pectore" by John Paul in the first group of cardinals named by the pontiff.
His name was made public in 1991, nine years before he died in Connecticut at the age of 98.
BTW, Mahony was on television tonight discussing how the Cardinals will elect a Pope for the "new era" of the Church.
To whom do you refer?
Who is he?
Here is an interesting take on the in pectore situation from a wise friend. I have permission to share -
---
This evening on MSNBC a "nun" -- plainclothes division -- who was with the
Canon Law Society of America (which is far from being orthodox) made the
following contentions in regard to a Cardinal "in pectore":
1. that he would not know his identity as a Cardinal.
2. that a Cardinal "in pectore" would have to make his status "public".
3. that a Cardinal "in pectore" would cease to be a Cardinal, upon the
death of the pope who created him a Cardinal.
The first statement is clearly ludicrous. Even in the Cold War days, there
was always a way to send a message by coded & covert means to inform the new
Cardinal. Bishops, Archbishops, and Cardinals "in pectore" are named by a pope
for a reason. They have a mission, which their status enables. While such status
can be a reward, it is not normally a "pat on the head".
Regarding the second statement, a Cardinal "in pectore" may (and usually is)
is normally instructed to keep his status secret -- a secret to be known only
to himself, future popes, and to others only on a "need to know" basis. This
is usually for the protection of the Cardinal. There would usually be some
sort of documentation in the possession of the Holy See, the Cardinal, or both to
prove his status.
The third statement is false. One is not made a Bishop, Archbishop, or
Cardinal - even if "in pectore" as a temporary measure. First because such a thing
would make no sense. Secondly such status gives very real spiritual authority
and status.
From what I know of "in pectore status", the recipient is normally instructed
to keep his status secret, until told otherwise by the pope -- or his
successor on the Throne of Peter.
-------
So perhaps it's not another chinese man.
it would be the mississippi, correct? well, at any rate,
peace be with you :-)
Isn't he excommunicated along with the other SPPX bishops?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.