Fair
74°
Morris, IL
Fair|Forecast »

Cardinal George says church shouldn't rush to meet to elect new pontiff

  Comments (...)
Text Size: AaAaAaAaAa

(Continued from Page 1)

Palmo said George's inclination not to rush "speaks to the sense I've heard from some that this is going to be a longer conclave than the last one because there's no clear-cut choice the way in retrospect there was in Ratzinger."

In order for the cardinals to meet earlier, Benedict must allow for an exception to the rule before he resigns.

But the Rev. Thomas Reese, senior fellow for the Woodstock Theological Center at Georgetown University, argued that if the pope changes the rules, conspiracy theorists would claim that he favors a particular candidate.

"Let's face it. The sooner the election, the better to the advantage to whoever happens to be the front-runner at the moment," Reese said.

He also argues that a rule change would place too much power in the hands of the cardinals who reside in Rome and would make it difficult for cardinals outside of Rome, especially in developing nations, to make a fully informed contribution.

While George said he doesn't want to rush the process, he hopes it's finished by Holy Week, the seven days leading up to and including Easter.

Indeed, Palmo said, a conclave starting March 15 could push the new pope's inauguration to Palm Sunday, when the liturgy calls on congregations to proclaim, "Crucify him," and "We have no king but Caesar," lines from the traditional story of Christ's Passion.

"It wouldn't mix with the inauguration of the pope," Palmo said with a chuckle.

Predicting how long the conclave might last is impossible, George said.

"You rely upon collective discernment, so you don't go in with your mind made up," he said. "You go in with indifference of mind and heart to try to discern, 'What does God want us to do?'"

||2|Next Page

Comments

Total Comments
0

View/Add Comments

There have been no comments made about this story.

Reader Poll

What is your stance on a proposed 1 percent sales tax to fund local school building projects?

I'm in favor of anything that will help improve school finances
I will support it if it helps to lower my property taxes
I oppose it because I don't believe it will impact property taxes and I will just pay twice
I'm against any additional taxes
I have not heard enough yet to form an opinion