Posted on 03/12/2013 11:37:09 PM PDT by boatbums
VATICAN CITY LONGEST CONCLAVE: In 1268, a conclave began that lasted nearly three years - 33 months to be exact. Pope Gregory X was elected pope, but not before residents of Viterbo, north of Rome, tore the roof off the building where the cardinals were staying and restricted their meals to bread and water to make them hurry up. Hoping to avoid a repeat, Gregory decreed in 1274 that cardinals would only get one meal a day if the conclave stretched beyond three days, and served bread, water and wine if it went beyond eight. While the meals served these days at the Vatican's hotel are by no means gourmet, the cardinals won't go hungry - no matter how long they take picking a pope.
SHORTEST CONCLAVE: Before 1274, there were times when a pope was elected the same day as the death of his predecessor. After that, however, the church decided to wait at least 10 days before the first vote; later that was stretched to 15 days to give all cardinals time to get to Rome. The quickest conclave observing the 10-day wait rule appears to have been the 1503 election of Julius II, who was elected in just a few hours, according to Vatican historian Ambrogio Piazzoni.
YOUNGEST/OLDEST POPE ELECTED: Pope John XII was just 18 when he was elected in 955. The oldest popes were Pope Celestine III (elected in 1191) and Celestine V (elected in 1294) who were both nearly 85. Benedict XVI was 78 when he was elected in 2005.
FUN FACTS: The last time a pope was elected who wasn't a cardinal was Urban VI in 1378 - he was a monk and archbishop of Bari. Pope Pius XII, who was pope during World War II, left a document informing the College of Cardinals that they should hold a conclave and elect a new pope if he were taken prisoner. While the Italians have had a stranglehold on the papacy over centuries, there have been many exceptions aside from John Paul II (Polish in 1978) and Benedict XVI (German in 2005). Alexander VI, elected in 1492, was Spanish; Gregory III, elected in 731, was Syrian; Adrian VI, elected in 1522, was from the Netherlands.
Antipopes
True. At times, there has been more than one person thought by many at the time to be the Pope of Rome, whose official title is Bishop of Rome. Divisions occurred within the Catholic Church, with each side electing their own pope. After the divisions were healed, the Church affirmed the papacy of whichever were deemed legitimately elected. The others are called, “antipopes.” “Anti-” here does not mean “counter-,” but rather, “other.” Some antipopes were holy men, thought of very highly by the same people who deemed their elections illegitimate. One even became a saint, Pope St. Hippolytus.
Also, the Pope of Rome is but one of several “Popes.” He is not only universal leader of the Catholic Church, but also the Patriarch of Rome. There are other patriarchs within and without the Catholic Church, and several also are called, “Pope.”
Women popes.
False. Some have taken a satire about a “Pope Joan” as if it were a historic fact, but the dates and identities of the medieval popes are well known, and there simply never was such a pope.
Black pope.
True... sort of. In contrast to the white vestments of the pope, the Superior General of the Society of Jesus (also known as the Jesuits) wears black vestments. Secular rulers used to have great say over who gets picked as bishop, but none over who gets picked as leaders of religious orders. Thus, in medieval times, religious orders were an important bulwark against the corruption of the Church. Secular rulers embittered by the power of the Jesuits took to calling their leader, “the black pope.” This was highly derogatory, although the Jesuits have developed a sense of humor over such things. Even the name “Jesuit” was once a slur, intended to accuse the Society of Jesus of heretically worshipping the man, Jesus, rather than the divine nature, Christ.
>> So how did the Apostle John feel about bowing down to and kissing the rings of Linus and Clement??? <<
DIdn’t happen, because John was in exile in Patmos. If he had been in Rome, presumably, he might have succeeded Peter, and Linus and Clement would have kissed his ring.
I said “list of Popes” NOT for creating the thread. If Boatbums would have given us the complete list of Popes, I would have thanked him.
Boatbums, the conclave for electing a Pope did NOT start in the 13th century...it’s ALWAYS been....sorry you misunderstood.
We'll just have to take your word for that, I guess.
More accurately, the process has always been electoral.
Over time the rules of electoral eligibility have been refined and the process has been regularized over time as well.
It became a conclave - i.e. a process where the electors are sequestered until they make a decision - in the 1200s.
There were no females.
Someone is giving you faulty information.
Who?
A Catholic hater, by chance?
Interesting that the brand new Pope elected today is a Jesuit.
Yes, thank you for that info. I know that Catholicism teaches that the popes were the "successors" to St. Peter and that the first ones were hand-selected by the Apostle to carry on the doctrines of the faith and to be the chief leader for all the churches of Christ. Do you know when that changed and, instead of the current pope selecting the man that would succeed him, it became an election decided by the other bishops without the input of the current pope? The reason I ask is that there HAVE been scandals in the past of popes "buying" the papacy and the election being one of popularity rather than through the leading of the Holy Spirit. Granted, Matthias was selected to succeed Judas Iscariot by the throwing of dice, so to speak, and the other Apostles trusting that the Holy Spirit would help them know who the twelfth Apostle should be, but the "tradition" espoused by Catholicism was that Peter named Linus to succeed him and Linus chose the next one and so forth. So, when did the process change and why? Do you know? Thanks.
Did you forget about Alexander VI (Rodrigo Borgia)?
I found that interesting too. Also that he is a “first” - Francis the 1st. Haven’t had a 1st in awhile either. Plus the first latin american Pope.
Lots of interesting things to think about.
From what we know, the ideal process in any diocese - including Rome - was to emulate Acts and to have worthy persons nominated and deliberated over by the priests of the diocese and have them choose.
Clearly any man recommended by a dying pope would be given serious consideration. And in times of persecution, when it was dangerous to gather and deliberate, the pope's designate was likely considered the appropriate choice.
The election today is not decided by bishops, but by cardinals.
Traditionally the priests of the diocese who were recognized by the bishop and given a congregation to pastor were considered to be "incardinated" into the diocese.
The term cardinals originally referred to the priests and deacons incardinated into the diocese of Rome.
Over time, bishops of prominence were given their own congregations or parishes within the diocese of Rome as their own - this was considered an honor, and those bishops were given the title of cardinals (in addition to their office as bishop).
there HAVE been scandals in the past of popes "buying" the papacy and the election being one of popularity rather than through the leading of the Holy Spirit
The institution of limiting the electorate to only cardinals was formalized in 1059, after the scandal of Benedict IX buying votes and using political pressure, and was a specific response to that scandal.
I would dispute that Benedict IX was not chosen by the Holy Spirit. In my opinion he was and his papacy teaches us a number of things:
(1) the office is what is holy, not the man who holds it.
(2) Benedict IX was corrupt, but he did not teach anything contrary to the Gospel, showing that the Holy Spirit preserves the Church from the gates of Hell, even if the Petrine office is held by someone deeply unworthy of it.
(3) The revulsion that Benedict IXC's simony created led to the Cluniac reform, and the election of some of the greatest popes, including St. Gregory VII, Bl. Urban II, and Innocent III.
So I disagree with your premise.
Granted, Matthias was selected to succeed Judas Iscariot by the throwing of dice, so to speak, and the other Apostles trusting that the Holy Spirit would help them know who the twelfth Apostle should be
In their opinion, both candidates were equally good, and their lots recall the Urim and Thummim.
the "tradition" espoused by Catholicism was that Peter named Linus to succeed him and Linus chose the next one and so forth. So, when did the process change and why?
The concept is that the Apostles as a college nominated two to join their college.
Once the Apostles dispersed, they chose their successors in their respective local churches.
If there was no chosen successor for a bishop - as in the time of persecution when bishops would often be seized and killed - then those who had been chosen by him as pastors chose someone from among their number.
until you answer that, please go away and leave us Christians to discuss Christian topics
Dunno. In any case, celibacy is a discipline, not dogma.
Actually, he’s not “Francis the 1st”, he’s just Pope Francis
WEll, to be specific, a non-Catholic. There are lots of those who use the “P” umbrella who are Unitarians, Jehovah’s Witnesses etc... and they are heavily represented among r group on FR
We could use another Pope Hilarius.
Come now, you can be more specific than that! As I have said many times I am a Christian. A born again, saved by the blood of Jesus by grace through faith and not by works, child of the Living God. So, no, I'm not a Roman Catholic anymore. That "P" umbrella is used a lot by Roman Catholics to mean anyone who isn't a Roman Catholic, but I think you already knew that, right?
And so too does the Unitarian Universalist in ur cliche and so too does the Jehovah's Witness. And so too do Mormons
Now just you wait a darned minute! How many times have we heard that if you were ever baptised a Catholic, you're always going to be a Catholic?
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.