It is PURELY a numbers game. How many tourist & PILGRIMS the deceased pope can attract to his burial site. IF Pope Francis was mega-popular like was ‘John Paul II‘ they would INSIST that he be buried in St. Peter’s, with most of the other VIP popes, so that they get MORE visitors — & with that donations & other REVENUE.
It is well known that John Paul II wished to be buried in Poland — but also knew, because he was quite savvy, that it would never happen. He was TOO MUCH of a DRAW.
Francis is liked BUT doesn’t have the following …
Hence, in terms of numbers it really wouldn’t matter where he was buried.
In a way it would be good for him to be buried at another Roman Basilica — so that that Basilica might get some additional traffic.
Is it totally ludicrous? That is the question. I, of course, have NO CLUE.
Yes, he had ‘secrets’. He used to sneak out to go skiing. He had a swimming pool built with funds whose source remains murky. Well, he had some other financial deals that were not totally transparent either — & we are not even going to mention his Rolex or Platinum Amex Card. Popes are expected to dabble in shady money. Part of the job. But, that is that, & this is rather different.
Of course we have also had some rather naughty popes. But, JP II? Yes, he had a colorful ‘youth’ (& have we EVER DETERMINED whether or not he was married before he became a priest, age 26) … and he was STILL YOUNG when elected pope. But?
I don’t know?
I am nonplussed. I could end up believing either side. That is the PROBLEM. I don’t know, but I also know that I don’t know ENOUGH to totally dismiss it.
So, all I can say is I am ALL EARS!
Hhhmmm.
We sure live in interesting times!
P.S., I did watch the ‘Vatican Girl’ miniseries as soon as it was released on Netflix. I was disappointed. I felt let down. There was never anything concrete. We just went around & round & in the end we were no wiser than we were at the start.
They are good friends — a very exclusive, mutual admiration club, each wishing he had the other’s powers. Though in hospital, taking a breather from his hectic Easter schedule, the pope is said to be very concerned as to the how Donald is getting treated in the U.S. He, given his propensity for catching ‘a cold’, was concerned that Donald might feel the cold in New York. Hence this jacket. A sign of solidarity, one ‘he-man’ to another. Touching.
This might spur Trump to take up the pope’s open invitation to move to the Vatican City where he will enjoy total immunity. His new plane should be able to make it from Florida to Italy. Once installed he will even stand a very good chance of getting elected the Next Pope, if & when Francis decides that it is time. He won’t have any problems getting the votes. The cardinals are very fond of playing ‘Simon Says’ — which they refer to as simony. Right up Trump’s alley.
The big question is whether Trump will appear in court wearing this very thoughtful & DOUBLE BLESSED jacket from his friend — as a talisman (though he doesn’t any luck to beat these phony, trumped up, politically weaponized charges).
It is very sobering & touching to see that the pope, though hospitalized, never stops thinking about others. Good on ya, Francis.
Click to ENLARGE. The start of ‘All the Popes‘ list (below)
The Vatican Marble Tablet of ‘Popes buried‘. Click to ENLARGE.Monument to Pius VIII (#254). Landmark for findling above Tablet. Click to ENLARGE.
The 2 lists provided below are MORE ACCURATE than any other list you are likely to find anywhere!
Most of you have probably seen at least a picture of this imposing, ~6′ tall marble tablet listing the names of the popes buried in St. Peter’s, under the Latin inscription SUMMI PONTIFICES IN HAC BASILICA SEPULTI (Supreme Pontiffs buried in this Basilica).
This tablet, in St. Peter’s is to the right of the entrance to the sacristy – that being the rather large ‘annex’ to the left of the main Basilica (when facing it). You reach it from the left aisle under the huge monument to Pius VIII (#254), pictured below.
The Vatican’s marble tablet lists 148 popes up to and including John Paul II (#266).
This 148 number is optimistic.
The actual number of popes now believed to be buried within the precincts of St. Peter’s is 137, possibly 138 or maybe 139 — and that includes the original Stephen (II) (#92), a bona fide pope albeit for four days, who is indeed buried there though NOT listed in the marble tablet.
WHY THE DISCREPANCY? The problem is that the list on the tablet does not reflect some bodies that were transferred away from St. Peter’s after they had been initially buried there.
St. Sixtus I (#7) is a good example. There is a wonderful story about what happened to the body of Sixtus I (which I recounted in my first book). Tradition maintains that Sixtus I was martyred (though this was unlikely) and buried under what is now St. Peter’s Basilica. It is also said that in 1132 Innocent II (#165), at the bidding of the residents of Alife [Italy], granted them Sixtus I’s relics. But the mule carrying the relics from Rome refused to go beyond Alatri [Italy]. So, the relics were interned at the Alatri Cathedral with Alfie just getting a finger bone.
But, his name appears on the marble tablet, thus making us rethink that old adage about things chiseled in stone – in this case, ‘soft,’ most likely Carrera, marble.
Here is THE list of the 13 popes that appear on the marble tablet but have since been translated to other locations:
1. St. Sitxus (#7) –> Alatri Cathedral, Italy 2. St. Anicetus (#11) –> Palazzo Altemps, Rome 3. St. Sorter (#12) –> San Martino ai Monti, Rome 4. St. Eleutherius (#13) –> Santa Susanna, Rome 5. Vigilius (#59) –> Santi Silvestro e Martino ai Monti, Rome 6. St. Paschal I (#99) –> Santa Prassede, Rome 7. John XVIII (XIX)(#142) –> St. John Lateran or San Paolo fuori le Mura, Rome 8. Honorius IV (#191) –> Santa Maria in Aracoeli, Rome 9. Eugene IV (#208) –> San Salvatore in Lauro, Rome 10. Callistus III (#210) –> Santa Maria de Monserrato degli Spagnoli, Rome 11. Pius II (#211) –> Sant’Andrea della Valle, Rome 12. Alexander VI (#215) –> Santa Maria de Monserrato degli Spagnoli, Rome 13. Pius III (#216) –> Sant’Andrea della Valle, Rome
So that is -13 [i.e., minus 13].
However, that has to be offset by 2 popes that are not on the marble tablet, but are indeed buried at St. Peter’s. These two are: Stephen (II) (#92) & John XI (#126).
Then we have Leo VIII (#132). Nobody knows where he is buried. Some suspect that he is indeed buried at St. Peter’s. So he gets the benefit of the doubt.
We also have the same problem with the pope hat succeeded him, Benedict V (#133). Again nobody can determine where he was buried. However, in his case, people are not as sure whether he is buried at St. Peter’s.
So here is how the numbers reconcile. 148 on the tablet. But we know 13 were translated away. So that is 148-13 which gives us 135. Then we have to ADD Stephen (II) and John XI. That takes us up to 137.
Whether we then add Leo VIII and Benedict V dictates whether we go with 138 or 139.
OK? Get the drift. Study the list.
MULTIPLE PHASES We also need to take into account that today’s magnificent Basilica, in its current grandiose form, now the second largest in the world, hasn’t always been there.
Initially, c. 60 AD, it was an open field, on top of a mound, on the outskirts of Rome. There was no building or structure. We have to take it on faith that those that succeeded St. Peter (#1) were buried close to him.
St. Anacletus (#3), c.76/79 – c.88/92, had a monument (possibly a chapel) built over St. Peter’s tomb. That was the first structure.
In the fourth century, at the behest of Emperor Constantine the Great a small Basilica was built on this site – the so called Old St. Peter’s or the Constantine Basilica. St. Leo ‘the great’ I (#45), in 461, was the first pope to be buried in this Basilica.
In the sixteenth century, Julius ‘the warrior pope’ II (#217), of the Sistine Ceiling fame, commissioned Donato Bramante, the great Italian architect, to build a bigger, grander Basilica around the by now dilapidated old structure. In time the incomparable Michelangelo Buonarroti, having finished the ceiling, designed the imposing timeless dome. Bramante had to do away with nearly all the papal tombs that were located in the old Basilica. Many of the remains were transferred to new locations within the new Basilica.
THE DEFINITIVE LISTS
Two seperate, (safe) PDF Files. Click on icon to OPEN.
Click to ENLARGE. From ‘Google News’. ‘Daily Mail’ article (top) quoted below.
Click to ENLARGE and read here. From the U.K. ‘Daily Mail’ (from today).
Come on. Give us a break. By Catholic Church & Vatican standards this is pretty tame, mundane & pedestrian.
A MFF threesome between ‘consenting’ adults. Nothing too drastically wrong with that.
Plus, Catholic celibacy per se only really precludes legal marriage & not sex. Catholic popes, cardinals, bishops & priests are all known to have had sex since the start — they having fathered tens of thousands of kids. So, please, don’t be deluded that Catholic clergy does not have sex. Moreover, do NOT — do NOT, EVER — forget the Catholic Sex Crimes against KIDS. That was sex — celibacy be screwed.
So, this is nothing. I am just so relieved that it did not involve any kids. God be praised.
A ‘Holy Trinity’ threesome is very wholesome for Catholic priests & nuns. Aren’t the nuns supposed to be married to God to begin with. So, this priest is only trying to help them out.
Ideally, this randy priest should have made to stop before he (initially) got into the HABIT. Boom. Boom.
For once, I am slightly skeptical. With all other Catholic clerics, including the ‘acquitted’ George Pell, I had no doubts; they were all guilty as accused & there are tons of others that never got accused or caught.
But, with Marc Ouellet, I, surprisingly, appear to be siding with the pope & Vatican! I have a hunch that this looks like a ‘put of job’ to harm the Vatican, the curia, the pope & obliterate Ouellet’s papabile prospects. By taking down Ouellet, another from the “ol’ guard” bites the dust. This increases the chance of a Francis acolyte becoming the next pope. At this rate, against all odds, baby-faced & still remarkably young (i.e., 65), Luis Antonio Tagle really could be the next pope! Sacré bleu.
I will also confess, that I was RELIEVED that Ouellet had NOT been accused of having his way with young boys. He has not been accused, at least as yet, of committing any overt sexual acts per se. His since, to date, appear to consist of unwelcome groping, pawing, kissing, etc. Not good — & as a father of three daughters, two still quite young, this does NOT make me happy, BUT it is not as bad as rape, oral sex or exposure. Ouellet basically is being accused of being yet another dirty old man!
I am sure events will unfold rapidly over the next few days. Stay tuned. Whatever happens, I am pretty sure that Ouellet as of now is NOT papabile & will never be.
I am here talking about the CURRENT curia organization.
The curial changes per Pope Francis’ Praedicate evangelium Apostolic Constitution do not kick in till June 5, 2022.
I am trying to put together, per my wont, of a DEFINITIVE, up-to-date listing of the ENTIRE curial structure — before & after Praedicate evangelium. As you can see above I have a first draft BUT it needs to be fleshed out. So, I am looking at multiple sources to help me construct the definitive picture.
I, of course, took a look at the Vatican’s official website, i.e., vatican.va.
I should have known better. It is NOT like I am a newcomer to this resource. Always AMAZES me that the Vatican is so lackadaisical when it comes to there website. It is not like they are short of resources. Rome is crawling with acolytes. But, the Vatican appears to have no interest in maintaining an up-to-date website. Well, to be fair, it the LEAST of their sins!
Click to access MY post, on this ‘Next Pope‘ Website in March 2021.
Click images to ENLARGE. Both from ‘Google News‘ & relate to unforgivable crime of murdering, innocent indigenous kids forced to attend Canadian ‘Residential Schools‘.
As far as I can tell Marc Ouellet was not personally responsible for any of these heinous crimes — though he may have known about it way, way before it became public.
If so, why would his papabili rankings take a nosedive?
Very simple. The Church (& in this case represented by the ultra-politic Cardinal Electors) will NOT want a Canadian pope at this juncture.
Having Marc Ouellet as pope will bring this ‘problem’ way too close to the Vatican.
For a start, a Canadian pope will immediately draw more attention to this crime. It will not go away as the Vatican hopes it will. As long as there is a Canadian pope at the Vatican this crime will get talked about.
Furthermore, Ouellet, as a Canadian, will not be able to distance himself from the crimes — like Francis is doing.
The Canadian authorities & people will DEMAND that he, as pope, openly address the issue. He will have no choice but to apologize.
The Church & the other cardinals don’t want this.
Canada is now a problem.
A Canadian pope will exacerbate that problem & continue to draw attention to it.
So, with that the only plausible papabili from the Americas bit the dust!
