The Election of a Pope Can Only Be Carried out by the Roman Clergy, Who Must Be Present for It to Be Valid.

This question of the involvement of the Roman clergy is something that the General Council will have to study in the case where an election would be necessary. In order to see why an election could eventually have to be done without the involvement of Cardinals, please see the other objections that treat this topic. 

There are two reasons to conclude that the election of a Roman Pontiff can be performed without the involvement of the Roman clergy:

a) The Pope is the Bishop of the Universal Church and can therefore be elected by the Universal Church.

b) The elective power of the Roman clergy is not necessarily of Divine law, and is therefore mutable.

 

a) The Pope is the Bishop of the Universal Church and can therefore be elected by the Universal Church.

The argument that the Roman Clergy must be present at a papal election rests upon the claim that, being the Bishop of Rome, the pope must therefore be elected by the clergy of Rome (whether that be the Cardinals or otherwise) because a pope ought to be elected by the clergy of his territory. However, according to this same logic it is also possible for the pope to be elected by the universal Church because the pope is not only the Bishop with Ordinary Jurisdiction over Rome, but has Ordinary and Supreme Jurisdiction over the Universal Church. [1]

Whilst sources commonly argue for the inclusion of the Roman Clergy in a papal election should the Cardinals become extinct, theologians nonetheless recognise that the involvement of the Universal Church can be valid, and may also take the place of the Roman Clergy:

St. Robert Bellarmine:

“If there were no papal constitution on the election of the Supreme Pontiff; or if by some chance all the electors designated by law, that is, all the Cardinals, perished simultaneously, the right of election would pertain to the neighboring bishops and the Roman clergy, but with some dependence on a general council of bishops.” [2]

Cardinal Cajetan:

“But if all the Cardinals should die, then the Roman Church itself succeeds immediately: the Church from which Linus was elected before any human electoral laws were known to us. Yet since the part is included within the whole, and within the universal Church the Roman Church is included, if in such a case a general council, with the Roman Church in concord (that is, with her assent), were to elect a Pope, then the man so elected would truly be Pope.” [3]

Theologian Charles Journet (following Cajetan):

“...in case of ambiguity (for example, if it is unknown who the true Cardinals are or who the true Pope is, as was the case at the time of the Great Schism), the power “of applying the Papacy to such and such a person” devolves on the universal Church, the Church of God… when the provisions of the Canon Law cannot be fulfilled, the right to elect will belong to certain members of the Church of Rome. In default of the Roman clergy the right will belong to the Church universal, of which the Pope is to be Bishop.” [4]

It is also worth noting that even if we recognise legitimate Cardinals as the Clergy of Rome, individuals who were neither Cardinals nor otherwise members of the Clergy of Rome took part in past elections, such as secular princes. [5] This demonstrates that the right to elect the pope itself is not necessarily tied to the Clergy of Rome in essence, otherwise the Clergy of Rome alone could ever meaningfully participate in papal elections.


b) The elective power of the Roman clergy is not necessarily of Divine law, and is therefore mutable.

Journet continues with the following statement:

“If the power to elect the Pope belongs, by the nature of things, and therefore by divine law, to the Church taken along with her Head, the concrete mode in which the election is to be carried out, says John of St. Thomas, has been nowhere indicated in Scripture; it is mere ecclesiastical law which will determine which persons in the Church can validly proceed to election.” [6]

This further confirms a common argument that we will make throughout our work: that the laws of papal election are mutable, human laws and ultimately exist only to serve the Divine mission of the Church, including the perpetual provision of Her head. Therefore, none of the provisions for election are to be taken as so absolute that they admit of no other alternatives, and none leave the Universal Church powerless. 

We end this answer with some recommended principles for how to interpret and apply Church Law:

“Third rule: In all matters pertaining to the precepts of morals and natural justice, if positive laws are lacking, natural law will be the law to which indications and affairs are to be directed.

Fourth rule: Although the Church can derogate, change, or dispense with nothing in divine and natural (primary) laws, the knowledge of natural law is not only useful but necessary for recognising which laws are natural and therefore immutable, and which are positive and thus subject to derogation, change, and dispensation.” [7]