Vatican City 2013 papal election

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Granted, there aren't a lot of voters (at most 118), and there won't be campaign ads to discuss. (At least I hope not!) However, it will be an election for the head of a sovereign country, so it seems to me a thread is appropriate here.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Technically Benedict could promote another two or three cardinals before the election starts.  There are two available slots now, and a third will open up before his retirement.  I do wish he'd picked a more auspicious day than the 80th anniversary of the Reichstag Fire Decree to retire on.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

With the conclave scheduled to start 15 March, that means we're down to 116 cardinal-electors as not only will Lubomyr Husar reach age 80 by then, but so will Walter Kasper.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

With the conclave scheduled to start 15 March, that means we're down to 116 cardinal-electors as not only will Lubomyr Husar reach age 80 by then, but so will Walter Kasper.

If I recall correctly (admittedly, I haven't checked recently), you are eligible, if you are under 80 at the time of the vacancy. So, Kasper should be fine.

Sources I've seen state that it's age 80 at the start of the conclave, which means Kaspar gets no vote unless it starts before the 5th, but also that Severino Poletto, Archbishop Emeritus of Turin won't suddenly lose his vote on the 18th if the conclave has already begun but not yet selected a replacement for the Pope Emeritus when he turns 80.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The Latin Church has already allowed some married ex-Anglican priests to retain their priestly status when returning to the embrace of the mother church.  I can easily see the requirement of priestly celibacy being relaxed further, either by creating a second Latin rite particular church is which married priests were allowed, or allowing individual episcopal conferences, provinces, and/or dioceses to decide whether to allow married priests.  As an institution, I think the Latin Church is unlikely to abandon priestly celibacy altogether.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Let's get this, Dolan.

Dolan has zero chance.  While he is certainly no Mahoney and indeed has done much to clean up the sex abuse problem the Roman church faces in the US, that scandal along with the traditional reluctance to name a cardinal from the US so as to avoid becoming embroiled in the foreign policy controversies of our republic means that no US cardinal has a shot at being the next pope, no matter his record.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Did someone really say Dolan has "zero" chance? Haha. Someone hasn't been following this that closely...

Yes, he has zero chance.  If he wasn't a US cardinal, he'd have a chance, but being from the US kills any and all chance he has.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The Papal Name chosen will be spoken in Latin, under the genitive case. If the new Pope takes the same name of the old Pope (that would be Benedict XVII), the Protodeacon doesn't speak the number.

Why is that?

Presumably because they figure in that case, everyone there will know to add one, whereas with a name not that of the most recent pope, there will be people who won't know what number with which to add one.  Tho I think John Paul III, would be blindingly obvious. (Not that I think that name will be chosen.)

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Well, until the white smoke arrives, all is guessing... this might take a while.

Until the bells ring, all is guessing.  There have been enough problems with the smoke in the past, that while it is a nice tradition, no one should depend on the smoke color as a clear signal.  s I recall, last time the quality of the smoke was such that if they had gone 50 votes, Fifty Shades of Grey could have been the title of a book about the conclave.  They ought to consider using colored smoke.  Keep the white to signal a new pope, but use red to signal they are all still cardinals.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

1- The Vaticanists will be kicking themselves once again for totally missing Bergoglio. In 2005 he was a footnote, and went on to be the strongest alternative to Ratzinger. It is said that he asked his colleagues to stop voting for him, but maybe he just did that to allow a quick resolution for the conclave, as Benedict XVI's election was basically inevitable. This time, he was said to be a kingmaker, but in the end he became the king himself...

He's a Jesuit, and as I understand it, part of their culture is to not seek out offices, so his refusing the papacy the first time it was offered to him would be in character, as would be accepting it once it was offered again.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I'm not convinced at all by this.  Supposed photocopies of three decade old documents implicating Francis?  At least whoever has provided these documents appears to have learned the 1^st rule of forging old typewritten documents: use an actual typewriter.