Here's a write up a wrote for a Catholic discussion group Renegade Trads http://renegadetrad.blogspot.com/. The writeup references an America magazine article from May 17, 2010. America is the national journal of the Jesuits in the U.S. The article referenced is at http://www.americamagazine.org/content/article.cfm?article_id=12295
----
I'm going to take the reforms of the America editors a few steps further. Term limits alone won't stem the issue of favoritism. There needs to be more checks and balances in Vatican administration.
The editors of America suggest five-year Curial term limits. I'd grant one optional one to two year term extension for curial officials during "interregnum". Any member of the episcopate could serve in the Curia, not just cardinals.
Pope Paul VI successfully transitioned the papacy from a temporal kingdom to a spiritual see during Vatican II. The next step is the reform of the papal court into a quasi-constitutional monarchy. In brief, this is how it could work.
The Pope would hold a role similar to a modern European monarch, albeit with a greater degree of executive power since the Vatican is not a democracy. Spiritually his role would not change. He could still invoke infallibility, author encyclicals and motu proprio, and call and dissolve councils. He would maintain his titles.
A lower "House of Bishops" should be elected by the entire episcopate. This body would serve as the House of Commons to the Curial House of Lords. Direct election among bishops is possible in the Internet age. Episcopal legislators would reside in Rome for their term.
The Pope would lose some control of the Curia in two respects: money bills and absolute power over Curial appointments. All money bills would be in the hands of the lower house in consultation with the Curia. The Pope would have no veto over money bills. The lower house could veto Curial appointments for just cause, i.e. the appointment committed a legal crime or failed to administrate a diocese justly. The Pope could petition the lower house to extend a Curial term, but his petition could be refused. Like the House of Lords, the Pope and Curia would have only two vetoes against the lower house.
Every year the Pope would offer a throne speech to a joint session of the House of Bishops and the Curia. Similar to Parliament, the throne speech will be authored jointly by the two houses and will outline the administrative goals of the year. The Papal throne speech will be televised live.
----
I'm going to take the reforms of the America editors a few steps further. Term limits alone won't stem the issue of favoritism. There needs to be more checks and balances in Vatican administration.
The editors of America suggest five-year Curial term limits. I'd grant one optional one to two year term extension for curial officials during "interregnum". Any member of the episcopate could serve in the Curia, not just cardinals.
Pope Paul VI successfully transitioned the papacy from a temporal kingdom to a spiritual see during Vatican II. The next step is the reform of the papal court into a quasi-constitutional monarchy. In brief, this is how it could work.
The Pope would hold a role similar to a modern European monarch, albeit with a greater degree of executive power since the Vatican is not a democracy. Spiritually his role would not change. He could still invoke infallibility, author encyclicals and motu proprio, and call and dissolve councils. He would maintain his titles.
A lower "House of Bishops" should be elected by the entire episcopate. This body would serve as the House of Commons to the Curial House of Lords. Direct election among bishops is possible in the Internet age. Episcopal legislators would reside in Rome for their term.
The Pope would lose some control of the Curia in two respects: money bills and absolute power over Curial appointments. All money bills would be in the hands of the lower house in consultation with the Curia. The Pope would have no veto over money bills. The lower house could veto Curial appointments for just cause, i.e. the appointment committed a legal crime or failed to administrate a diocese justly. The Pope could petition the lower house to extend a Curial term, but his petition could be refused. Like the House of Lords, the Pope and Curia would have only two vetoes against the lower house.
Every year the Pope would offer a throne speech to a joint session of the House of Bishops and the Curia. Similar to Parliament, the throne speech will be authored jointly by the two houses and will outline the administrative goals of the year. The Papal throne speech will be televised live.