Pope Francis Did This Right...

When Pope Benedict XVI resigned in 2013, I was alarmed that papal resignations would become normatve from there on out—that future popes would simply expected to resign, such that a pope actually dying in office would become a relic of a bygone age. The life tenure of a pope is, ultimately, reminiscent of the historically monarchical nature of the papal ministry. The pope  holds the place of the Prince of the Apostles and is himself a monarch over Vatican City. 

Since Vatican II, however, almost every other symbol of papal monarchy has been systematically expunged, from the papal tiara to the sedia gestatoria to abolition of the Papal Court. Why should not the lifetime tenure of the pope also be abolished? Could not Benedict's resignation serve as a kind of template for a modern Church wishing to divest itself of the final remnants of papal monarchy? Indeed, Benedict's resignation was roundly praised at the time for this very reason, that it showed a way forward for the papacy to evolve into something more representative of the modern spirit. We even had commentators gushing over the idea that there could be multiple living Popes Emeritus at any one time, who would constitute a sort of "council of elders" for the reigning pope to consult.

It is supremely ironic that the final act of Benedict XVI—the "pope of tradition"—was his greatest novelty. The papal resignation, unprecedented in modern times, paved the way for the election of Jorge Bergoglio and the twelve years of ensuing chaos. Francis, of course, owed his pontificate to this act of resignation, and stated that Benedict XVI had "opened the door" the possibility of future papal retirements. Francis himself was frequently asked whether he might consider resigning if worn down by illness, to which he often gave contradictory answers. But I think those of us who understood the nature of this pope knew very well he would never resign. For His Humbleness, the papal office was an exercise of raw power, a mandate of plentitude that allowed him to entirely remake the Church in his own image and likeness. There was never any chance he would step down. Francis would cling tenaciously to power until his dying breath. 

Ironically, Francis's dogged refusal to resign is perhaps his one decision I agree with the most. While I was certainly no fan of this pontificate, I do believe the papacy is for life. Had Francis imitated Benedict in resigning, it would have reinforced papal resignation, transforming Benedict's singular novelty into a precedent. Future popes would simply be expected to resign, just like each successive pope is expected not to use the sedia gestatoria. With two popes as diverse as Benedict and Francis each resigning in turn, it would have created momentum, a sense of change, a sense of "this is the way we do things now." I understand that Francis's refusal to resign was not grounded in any lofty motives about the preservation of the monarchical view of the papacy, but frankly, I don't really care what his rationale was. I'm just glad he didn't do it.

Interestingly, had Francis hypothetically resigned the papacy, he stated that he would have taken the title "Emeritus Bishop of Rome," not "Pope Emeritus" as Benedict XVI had done. This is, of course, a more precise and fitting title for a former pope than "Pope Emeritus." Francis also said, furthermore, he would not have continued to live at the Vatican but at a home for retired priests in Rome, which is, of course, fitting, since he would not longer have been pope and would have no business remaining in the Vatican. It is ironic that Francis's plans for a hypothetical retirement would have been handled in a more traditional manner than Benedict's was.

Did I support Francis's vision for the Church? Heck no. And while part of me likes the idea that we could have had a much shorter Franciscan pontificate, when I consider the big picture, I am glad he didn't resign. A resignation would have gotten rid of Francis sooner, but it would have undoubtedly enshrined the act of resignation as a new norm that each successive pope would be expected to follow. And that, I think, would profoundly warp how the Church views the papal office. It would have encouraged Catholics to consider the papacy in fuctional terms, almost according to utilitarian criteria, even more so than they already do. 

While there is undoubtedly a performative aspect to the papacy, the pope is ultimately a spiritual father. We may debate whether Francis was a good spiritual father, and I know very well where I stand in that discussion. But fatherhood itself extends beyond concerns that are merely functional. The biblical Book of Sirach reminds us that a father remains a father even when his faculties fail him: "O son, help your father in his old age...even if his mind fails him, show forbearance" (Sir. 3:12-13). I am convinced that when we start pressuring popes to resign as soon as they become incapable of being globe-trotting celebrities, we are doing violence to the office of the papacy—an office which is bigger than the individual who happens to be holding it. Fatherhood is for life, and this should be respected in the lifetime tenure of the papal office. Francis certainly did incalculable damage to the office he inherited, the ramifications of which will be discussed by historians for generations to come. But at least, in dying at his post, he did something right, for which I will give him credit.