On May 7, 133 Cardinals of the Catholic Church will gather in Rome to elect a new pope. The "Cardinal-Electors," as they will be known, hail from 71 different countries and are decidedly less "Euro-centric" than the conclave has been in the past.
We have Pope Francis to thank for that. Of the 135 members of the College of Cardinals, 108 were appointed by the late pope.
Francis wanted a church more in tune with the Global South. He appointed several cardinals from nations such as Haiti, Cape Verde, Paraguay, and the Central African Republic, as well as other nations that had never been represented in the college before.
Those who might have dared hope that the Catholic Church would shift even a little to the right with the election of a new pope are going to be very disappointed.
The last pope to have such an outsize effect on the conclave was John Paul II, who named 231 cardinals during his 27-year pontificate. His successor, Pope Benedict, a shy and retiring man, only rarely asserted himself during his eight years in office, becoming the first pope in 600 years to resign in 2013.
Francis succeeded him and gave the liberal Europeans and left-wing members of the Secretariat almost everything they desired.
Now, as the Cardinals gather in the Sistine Chapel to elect a new pontiff, the ancient question is asked by the pious and sinners alike.
Who will wear the Shoes of the Fisherman?
Before John Paul II's election in 1978, the question would have been answered by saying, "An Italian, of course!" But John Paul II, Benedict, and Francis all wanted to change that answer. John Paul placed key, non-Italian allies in the Secretariat, the most powerful governing body of the Church. Benedict appointed other Europeans, while Francis was more ecumenical in his choices.
Today, there are 53 cardinals from Europe, including 19 from Italy. There are 37 Cardinals from the Americas, 23 from Asia, 18 from Africa, and four from Oceania. Two college members will be absent due to illness.
What goes on behind the locked doors of the Sistine follows strict protocols laid down a thousand years ago. The outline of those protocols can be seen in the excellent 1968 film "Shoes of the Fisherman," which starred Anthony Quinn, Oskar Werner, and David Janssen. While the political intrigue was fanciful, the rituals of the voting were accurate, and the issues addressed were very topical for the 1960s.
The film tells the story of the election of a Russian pope who must find a way to head off a war between China and Russia. Just ten years later, a Polish pope was elected. Soon after, the Soviets tried to kill him.
The more recent film about the election of a pope, "The Conclave," was a horrible, anti-Catholic train wreck. One reviewer called it "a badly written, poorly researched, half-baked mystery that takes itself too seriously but turns at times into unwitting comedy."
The actual Conclave will not be doing much laughing. They must elect a new pope as the Church is in crisis.
The new pope must deal with financial instability, declining church attendance in some regions, and ongoing doctrinal debates. Additionally, the issue of sexual abuse within the Church, the role of women, and LGBTQ+ inclusion will continue to be points of contention. Even though many cardinals would like to see them disappear, those issues will come to the fore.
It's impossible to predict who might become the next pope. One intriguing possibility is Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa. While he's an Italian, his latest apostolic posting was as patriarch of Jerusalem. With Christians being persecuted in several Arab nations, and conflict in the region never far from the surface, if the conclave wanted to send a message, the patriarch might be tapped for the job.
But Pizzaballa is only 60 years old, and the Vatican's old guard doesn't want a pontiff who could stay in office for a quarter of a century.
If the conclave goes on for more than a few days, a compromise candidate – one of the older cardinals – may emerge to claim the Throne of St. Peter. But with so many new cardinals, it's hard to gauge how much tradition plays into their thinking.
