I frankly do not understand why Messori considers this an issue or unresolved at all...
The unresolved issue of Benedict XVI's
residing within the Vatican
by Vittorio Messori
Translated from
March 23, 2013
These recent weeks, there has been extended use (sometimes abuse) of the adjectives 'historical' and 'epochal'. But today's event deserves some emphasis: the encounter - in an atmosphere which will certainly be of great fraternal solidarity - between the reigning Pope and the emeritus is absolutely unprecedented.
As has been reiterated many times these days, there have been examples of 'papal renunciation' in the past, but in turbulent times, such as episodes within the context of the struggles between Popes and anti-Popes.
The only precedent that is somehow similar to what took place on February 11 is that of Celestine V. Who certainly was not embraced by his successor, since Boniface VIII immediately concerned himself with neutralizing the resigned Pope fearing that he might revoke the abdication. The final outcome was that the former Pope Pietro da Morrone - after escapes attempted on land and by sea - ended his days, at age 86, in a cell that was not in a monastery but in a fortress where he was imprisoned by his predecessor.
So nothing to do at all with the meeting to take place today in Castel Gandolfo. Perhaps we shall learn nothing about it, except in the posthumous diaries of either Joseph Ratzinger or Jorge Mario Bergoglio.
And yet, not just every journalist covering the religion beat but also every church historian, will be hanging on what will happen at the unprecedented meeting.
The former Archbishop of Buenos Aires was made a cardinal in the Consistory of 2001 under John Paul II. But it is certain that his nomination would have carried the endorsement of the then Prefect for the Doctrine of the Faith. Cardinal Ratzinger very much appreciated that Bergoglio was one of the few South American Jesuits who disapproved of the Marxist perspective of liberation theology, for which he became the target of criticisms and accusations by his fellow Jesuits.
So today's meeting will not be between a 'conservative' and a 'progressivist' - as gross ideological reading would have it - but between two servants of the Church who are aware that there is a difference between Christian charity and class warfare, between religious homily and political tirade, between a priest of Christ and a guerrilla.
Nor will it be a meeting between a young man and an old man - Bergoglio is almost the age Ratzinger was when he was elected Pope.
Knowing the refined thoughtfulness of Ratzinger, I would dare say that he will abstain from giving any advice, but limit himself to calling attention to the main problems that have remained unresolved.
There has been talk that Benedict XVi prepared some sort of memorandum for his successor in bearing the heavy burden of Peter. It may be so, but one can suppose that, even in this case, the intention would be informative and not 'pedagogical', as though the new Pope needed to be instructed.
The emeritus Pope has said clearly before his departure from the scene: His intention was to remain 'hidden from the world", but to continue serving the Church on prayer, certainly not collaborating in the governance of the Church, however discreet.
But then, there remains the question many have asked: Would not staying 'within Peter's paddock' make this intention of remaining 'hidden' difficult?
I must say that even if I had not anticipated Benedict XVI's decision to renounce the Pontificate, I had reflected many times about the possible refuge for a Benedict XVI forced by age and the burden of the task to leave his ministry.
I thought first of all of his native Bavaria, where there are still many Benedictine abbeys in magnificent sites, often in forests surrounded by mountains. But advanced age and frail health would keep him from going to any place with a severe Alpine climate.
What about southern Italy? I thought of Calabria, the Charterhouse of Serra San Bruno, resting place of the order's founder? Benedict XVI made a pilgrimage there two years ago. But a charterhouse is no place for a man of advanced age who will eventually need constant physical assistance.
The monks of San Bruno live isolated in cells that open, on one side, to the cloister, and on the other, to the gardens and orchards they have to tend. The small infirmary will certainly be inadequate.
If I had been asked to suggest the right place for an emeritus Pope to stay hidden, I would not have hesitated to point to Provence, in the Vaucluse, at the feet of Mont Ventoux. To be more precise, in the locality called Le Barroux.
There, the climate is not just ideal and the landscape enchanting, but here, in 1970, an abbey arose which Joseph Ratzinger liked so much that he often visited there for a few days, sometimes incognito, sometimes on official visit.
The founder, dom Gerard, who did not want to accept after Vatican II that Benedictines could be forbidden to use Latin for the liturgy, had left his own monastery to found one which would continue Tradition and return to strict observance of St. Benedict's Rule.
Here Gregorian chant is performed with such perfection that their recordings on CD are appreciated throughout the world. The abbey attracts many young men as novices, attracted by the austerity of life in the abbey.
Having often experienced myself that place of great fascination, I learned from the superiors that, first as cardinal and later as Pope, Benedict XVI had confided that it could be his final refuge.
Instead, here he is in Castel Gandolfo provisionally, and perhaps definitively, in a building in the Vatican Gardens. The emeritus Pope has said that even this physical nearness to the tomb of Peter is a sign that he has not abandoned the Church and will continue his service through prayer. He has indicated that there would be no problems of 'coexistence' with the reigning Pope since he is in retirement.
The problem may seem secondary but it is not, especially to those familiar with the ecclesial ambience and its nuances. It is clear that Pope Francis will welcome any decision made by his predecessor, but it is also possible that this is one of the issues they will discuss today - an unprecedented development in a Church that thought she had experienced everything after two centuries.
Everything but this singular 'con-dominium' of a reigning Pope and the emeritus Pope in the tiny territory of Vatican City State.
[Why and how could this be a problem or an issue at all? Benedict XVI will surely not be issuing bulletins commenting on his successor's decisions, nor will he be granting media interviews. It isn't even clear if he will continue to publish anything new. For Messori, of all people, to have any doubts about this is very puzzling - especially as he says explicitly that Knowing Joseph Ratzinger as he does, he cannot imagine him volunteering any advice for the new Pope. Moreover, he seems to ignore all the practical considerations for why the emeritus Pope could not possibly live elsewhere than the Vatican - security (no special arrangements and expenses have to be made if he continues to live in the Vatican), protection from malicious arrest (from those who insist against all facts on blaming him for the sexual abuses of priests), preventing the creation of a 'pilgrimage' site wherever else he would be living. And if the reigning Pope, who is very secure about being Pope (and why not?), does not mind, why should anybody else?]
