ROME LETTER: One swollen kneecap and the Vatican rumour-mill has roared into action. The knee in question belongs to Pope John Paul II and last Sunday its painful and arthritic condition prompted the 81-year-old pontiff to take a secondary role during the three-hour Palm Sunday Mass in St Peter's Square.
Although the knee problem had already caused the Pope to cancel one public audience and three parish visits in the last month, it was only when he took a back-seat at the ceremony which marks the beginning of the most important week in the Christian calendar that people sat up and noticed.
Further attention was focused on the Pope's health when spiritual writer Vittorio Messori suggested, in an article in Monday's Corriere Della Sera, that senior cardinals were beginning to express the wish that the Pope would invoke Article 332 of Canon Law, the one which allows him to "renounce" the See of Peter (not resign since you can only resign if you have a boss).
Were Vittorio Messori merely another "Vaticanologist", his observations would probably have attracted little attention. But Messori is a rather special writer, the man who is credited with having "edited" the Pope's 1994 bestseller, Crossing the Threshold of Hope, a sort of extended interview with the Pope about Christianity, faith, Buddhism, Judaism and much else besides.
Messori claims that unnamed cardinals have already suggested to the Pope that, "in the presence of God", he consider taking the Article 332 option. Another unnamed cardinal is alleged to have expressed the worry that "in this long twilight (of the pontificate) we had better be ready for every and anything", asking if "the church can live on through similar uncertainty?"
Messori suggests, furthermore, that those cardinals are worried about what new initiative the Pope will take next. Will there be more mea culpas, more visits to mosques, more Assisi-type days of inter-religious togetherness?
In short, will there be more occasions when the Pope could confound their best-laid, conservative plans? No one can answer such questions but what seems sure is that, as senior Vatican sources confirmed (not for the first time) to The Irish Times yesterday, Pope John Paul is not the renouncing kind. Not only is it against his ruggedly determined faith to throw in the towel, but he believes he was put on the throne of Peter by divine will and only God can remove him.
When discussing the role of the Pope, it is essential never to forget that the Catholic Church is neither a democracy nor a multinational business corporation. Practices and procedures (such as the enforced retirement of an ailing chief executive), which seem logical in the context of the board room or the parliament, are simply irrelevant to the church.
In pragmatic terms, too, Vatican sources pointed out yesterday that the renunciation of the Pope could prove problematic. Even if he did head off to a monastery in Krakow, with a title of Pope emeritus, he would still remain a special figure for millions of Catholics worldwide.
In short, his very presence could become a problem for his successor. What would happen, for instance, if a new pope introduced changes that appeared to move away from the conservative theology of John Paul II? Would many Catholics not then be tempted to appeal to John Paul II, putting both him and his successor in an awkward position?
One final thought concerns the Pope's ongoing programme. He may have opted not to stand for the three hours of the Palm Sunday Mass but he continues to fulfil a busy schedule.
Last Saturday he met doctors attending a medical congress, while on Monday he met 4,000 Opus Dei university students. Furthermore, during the next few days he will preside over eight major ceremonies, including the Good Friday Via Crucis in the Colosseum.
On top of that, the papal agenda envisages a trip to Bulgaria in May, a 10-day visit to Canada (for World Youth Day), Mexico and Guatemala in July and a trip to his native Poland in August. Hardly sounds like the diary of a man intent on renouncing office, does it?