The oath sworn by the Cardinal electors in the Sistine Chapel is a litmus test of the health of the Church. There’s a saying that a fish rots from the head down. If Cardinals can’t keep this solemn oath preserving the secrecy of the Conclave, what hope that others throughout the Church take their oaths and promises seriously. Pray that Cardinal electors are not tempted to break their oath of secrecy during and after the Conclave. Let’s not hear any stories about how the new pope reacted when asked the question of his acceptance of the election to the See of St. Peter. This is a profoundly personal moment that should remain private, unless revealed by the pope himself.
Cardinal Re invites his fellow Cardinal electors to process into the Sistine Chapel with these words:
Once within the Sistine Chapel Blessed John Paul II’s Apostolic Constitution Universi Dominici Gregis sets out the oath sworn by the Cardinal electors in the Sistine Chapel before voting:
We, the Cardinal electors present in this election of the Supreme Pontiff promise, pledge and swear, as individuals and as a group, to observe faithfully and scrupulously the prescriptions contained in the Apostolic Constitution of the Supreme Pontiff John Paul II, Universi Dominici Gregis, published on 22 February 1996.
We likewise promise, pledge and swear that whichever of us by divine disposition is elected Roman Pontiff will commit himself faithfully to carrying out the munus Petrinum of Pastor of the Universal Church and will not fail to affirm and defend strenuously the spiritual and temporal rights and the liberty of the Holy See.
In a particular way, we promise and swear to observe with the greatest fidelity and with all persons, clerical or lay, secrecy regarding everything that in any way relates to the election of the Roman Pontiff and regarding what occurs in the place of the election, directly or indirectly related to the results of the voting; we promise and swear not to break this secret in any way, either during or after the election of the new Pontiff, unless explicit authorization is granted by the same Pontiff; and never to lend support or favour to any interference, opposition or any other form of intervention, whereby secular authorities of whatever order and degree or any group of people or individuals might wish to intervene in the election of the Roman Pontiff.’
Protect the Pope comment: This solemn oath makes it absolutely clear that the Cardinal electors are bound to keep the actions of the Conclave secret both during and after the election of the new Pontiff, unless they have explicit authorization from the same Pontiff. So unless authorized by Benedict XVI it has been quite wrong for a certain cardinal to give interviews to The Guardian, The BBC and Sky which disclose intimate details of the 2005 Conclave such as Benedict XVI’s initial reaction on being elected pontiff. But then maybe Benedict XVI gave him explicit authorization. Here’s hoping that the current Cardinal electors will respect this solemn oath. The failure to observe solemn promises and oaths plays a large part in the erosion of the authority of the Church. If gold rusts what will iron do! We must all keep our vows and promises, the vow of celibacy for priests, the vow of fidelity and openness to life for married couples, the vow of loyalty to the Pope for Cardinals.
Nick
i thought some would like to read the homily of the Dean of the College of Cardinals, Cardinal Angelo Sodano which he gave at the mass for the conclave.
In it he sees the papacy as a source of unity among Catholics and of evangelization,
that the new pope carries on the work of proclaiming justice and peace to the world
and the new pope presents the love of the Father for all people.
http://www.news.va/en/news/homily-of-cardinal-angelo-sodano
Thanks Peter
Deacon Donnelly, I don’t follow the British news media and so I don’t know to whom you are referring, but Pope Benedict himself revealed intimate details of the Conclave (relative to himself, I might add) in an address to German pilgrims on 25 April 2005 – a week after his election. His comments included this :-
“When, little by little, the trend of the voting led me to understand that, to say it simply, the axe was going to fall on me, my head began to spin. I was convinced that I had already carried out my life’s work and could look forward to ending my days peacefully. With profound conviction I said to the Lord: Do not do this to me! You have younger and better people at your disposal, who can face this great responsibility with greater dynamism and greater strength. I was then very touched by a brief note written to me by a brother Cardinal. . . [which he quotes]”
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2005/april/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20050425_german-pilgrims_en.html
Is it possible it is the same cardinal as in your case? Or are you perhaps referring to the alleged “Conclave Diary” published in the Italian journal “Limes” in late September 2005?
Sandro Magister dismissed it as a fake a couple of weeks later
http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1336677?eng=y
Nevertheless, this year he seems to have attached some credibility to it
http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1350453?eng=y
How and when and if was rehabilitated as a reliable source, I cannot say. Attempting to reconstruct the voting at conclaves is not a new game, as can be seen from the analysis given of every conclave between 1878 and 1978 in this curious book :-
“Passing the Keys. Modern Cardinals, Conclaves, and the Election of the Next Pope” by Francis A. Burkle-Young. (Lanham, Maryland: Madison Books, 1999).
Bain, the cardinal in question revealed more about Cardinal Ratzinger’s response than Pope Benedict does, which I won’t repeat. It’s one thing the pope revealing his response, and quite another a cardinal giving information that the pope hasn’t. As the oath states, the pope has to give his personal authorization for a cardinal to break his oath of secrecy. Deacon Nick
After the Pope election,the Sistine Chapel open to the visitors next Monnday March 18 th.