The decision of Benedict XVI to follow the precedent of Celestine V, who was pope for less than 18 months (13 Dec 1292–19 May 1294), raises the fascinating possibility that the papacy could revisit other ancient traditions that have since fallen into neglect.
One of these is the major constitutional reform introduced into the Church in 1059 by another pope, Nicholas II, who established the principle that to be canonically elected, a pope needed to be chosen with the assent not just of the cardinal bishops and other cardinal clergy, but of the whole of the Church: 'and then the rest of the clergy and the people shall approach to give their assent to the new election' (Gratian, Decretum 1.23.1).
As no mechanism was implemented to enforce this part of the constitutional reform, the papacy has failed for centuries to live up to its own canon law. Any new pope constitutionally needs the assent of the entire Church.
Nicholas II was challenging a system that had then prevailed for several centuries, whereby the Pope was effectively appointed by the Holy Roman Emperor. His establishment of a College of Cardinals was explicitly intended to challenge a system of ecclesiastical appointment that had become notoriously corrupt.
The notion of a cardinal (literally a hinge) has nothing to do with the hierarchy of holy orders. There were originally cardinal deacons and priests as well as cardinal bishops, each representing their particular grade within the Church. The text of the 1059 constitutional reform, which became part of canon law, makes clear that the papal election needed the support not just of the cardinals but of the clergy and people as a whole.
If the Church is serious about the need for reform of its governance it would do well to revisit the major constitutional reforms established in the 11th century. There is no reason why the category of cardinal could not be restored to those in the Church below the rank of bishop, or indeed be given to lay men and lay women.
The College of Cardinals is meant to be a representative assembly. In the 11th century, literacy outside the clerical and monastic orders was not widespread. The appointment of cardinals was intended to be a circuit breaker, to identify talented individuals outside the aristocratic elite that traditionally governed the Roman Church. A new pope needs to consider ways of returning to the reforms initiated by Pope Nicholas II.
Needless to say, those reforms were manipulated by subsequent popes (and perhaps even more by cardinals who desired papal office) to ensure that such dangerous principles as representation should be quietly forgotten. That is another reason for revisiting the core principles that lie behind the present structures of the Church.
The notion that the election of a pope should involve 'clergy and people' was not a new-fangled notion in the 11th century. The earliest law codes of the Church emphasise that any bishop had to be chosen by clergy and people. Pope Nicolas II believed he was recovering ancient traditions of the Church that had been lost as a consequence of political interference by secular authorities, keen to use bishops to legitimate their own power.
The genius of Pope Nicolas II was to create an electoral college entrusted with making the initial choice of a candidate, who then had to win support from representatives of other ranks of clergy, namely priests, deacons and subdeacons, and from clergy and people as a whole. External political influence was forbidden. He wanted the same procedure to apply to choosing bishops.
We need a pope not just to transform the electoral system for choosing his successor, but to provide inspiration for a journey that has not finished. My vote would be for a new Pope Nicholas.
Professor Constant J. Mews teaches medieval history in the School of Historical Studies, Monash, where he is Director of the Centre for Studies in Religion and Theology.