You had it first here.

That is if you are a long-time reader of this column. You would have been armed for the surprising news of Pope Benedict XVI’s retirement.

Ten years ago, in an article that appeared in October of 2003 while John Paul II still held the office, I wrote the following words:

“I also think that the pope’s anniversary would have been a fine occasion for him to retire.  Like others, I worry about the church’s lack of a plan when its leader is suffering severe disabilities that, in time, could lead to crippling incapacity or even dementia.”

Later, in April of 2008, I wrote about Pope Benedict:

“I would also welcome an announcement that the pope expects to retire on a specific date. In the modern era, when life can be extended long after one’s vital powers have declined, I regard it as necessary for the pope to join his brother bishops in serving a limited term of office.”

At the time they were written, my views probably seemed extreme.  No doubt some readers dismissed them as wildly unlikely, even heretical.

In any event, I never expected any pope would retire in my lifetime. Rather, I saw papal retirement as something that would come in the distant future.  Well, that future has made a surprise appearance.

 Benedict, breaking a tradition of some 600 years, has made the retirement of a pope understandable. In fact, he deserves great credit for having given up his position. He has sacrificed power and prestige for the good of the church.

Those close to Benedict knew of his decline.  Vatican insiders recognized that he could no longer handle the huge responsibilities of the papacy. But, in true Vaticanistry they kept it quiet.

No doubt Benedict learned from the experience of his predecessor John Paul II.  In his latter years that pope, afflicted with Parkinson’s disease, could not bear the burdens of his office. But doggedly he refused to quit.

It emerged after his retirement announcement that Benedict has a heart pacemaker.  At age 85, he probably has other physical problems too. 

Again, he merits praise for having dared to look at reality instead of struggling on.  In facing his mortality, he has proven himself human like the rest of us.

I wonder how my father would have taken this event.  As a journalist, he went to Rome and covered the election of Eugenio Pacelli as Pope Pius XII in 1939. And, along with a dozen other American editors, he was received by that pope at Castel Gandolfo at the end of a European trip in 1946.

Probably, my father would not have envisioned that pope (or any other) resigning his office

As to Benedict’s successor, no one has the faintest who he will be.  I can tell you one thing: it will not be an American.  No matter how charming and down-to-earth that American is reputed to be.

Susan, my spouse, is rooting for the archbishop of Manila. At 55, he is the youngest of all the cardinals.  And he did some of his graduate studies in the United States.  I rate his chances as next to nil.

My own choice is a charismatic cardinal from South America, full of concern for the poor and ready to bring about radical change in the church.  It does not help that I do not know if such a cardinal exists but I believe in the power of imagination.

Like many other Catholics of a certain age, I look back to Pope John XXIII as my ideal.  Starting in 1959 and extending into the Second Vatican Council of 1962, his leadership changed my world.

He recognized how the church needed to be changed and had the courage and wisdom to carry out the changes despite dug-in opposition.