One would think that for the funeral of a great man, the members of the various media could maintain a respectful silence, and wait until the period of mourning ended before discussing who that man’s successor would be. But for those latter-day jesters, our so-called reporters, that would appear to be too much responsibility to expect of them, particularly as regards his late Holiness, Pope St. John Paul the Great.
Perhaps it is too much to expect dignity or solemnity from reporters; one could at least expect veracity and accuracy from them. But over the last 30 years, I have found that when reporters speak regarding any subject of which I have personal knowledge, they have regularly and uniformly mis-stated the obvious. The present situation is no exception.
For example, I have heard or read from TV stations or newspapers that the next Pontiff
will be an Italian, or an African, or an Asian, or an American; that the upcoming election will be a battle between the Northern and Southern Hemispheres, or between North America and the rest of the world. I have also heard from at least one self-appointed “expert” that the next conclave will choose a “caretaker” pope; one who will be elderly and therefore not long for this world. As of this morning, I have even read (in the
Los Angeles Times) that His Eminence, Roger Cardinal Mahony should be elected as the next pontiff.
In short, I have heard and read a great deal of authoritatively spoken and written rot, which does not appear to take into consideration the facts, or the minds of those who will be casting lots for our next Pope. It appears that many reporters are attempting to translate their wishful thinking into authoritative statements. It has worked about as well as the attempts of alchemists to turn lead into gold. Or, as my late grandfather was in the habit of saying (a bit more pungently than I am willing to set down here): “You can boil manure for hours, and it will still be manure.”
I have taken the liberty of looking at a web-page that has more information concerning the papal electors than I have seen anywhere else: www.catholic-pages.com. It names
all of the 117 voting cardinals, and give brief biographies for each of them. It also permits one to view the cardinals by nationality, age, and a number of other factors. As a result, I have been able to clear away much of the rot spoken or written by our so-called reporters.
For example, in looking at the papal electors by continent, I have come up with the following figures:
Europe 57
North America 14
South and Central America 22
Asia (including Australia) 12
Africa 12
Total 117
Assuming that a deadlocked conclave is permitted to elect a successor with a simple majority(which I understand is the case under the revised special rules for electing the Roman Pontiff), then Europe has most of the votes necessary (i.e., 57 of the 59 votes). Even if all the Cardinals of South America, Asia and Africa combined, they would not have sufficient votes to form a majority. Thus, assertions that the next conclave will be a battle between East and West, or North and South, are ill-informed and inaccurate. It is more likely that the cardinals of Europe and North America, or Europe and South America, will combine to choose the next Pope.
On the other hand, it is also obvious that the countries with the most votes (e.g., Italy with 21 votes, or the USA with 11 votes), have insufficient numbers to sway an election by themselves. The likelihood that an Italian or an American
will be elected are therefore minimal.
From the figures as stated, it is more than likely that the next Pope may be a European. If one considers that the Cardinals, as a group, are intelligent, knowledgeable, and vastly educated and experienced men, it would be unlikely that as a group they would vote for a candidate merely because he came from a particular country or continent. Thus, they would probably not vote for an African or an Asian, unless the particular African or Asian were uniquely qualified (as for example His Eminence, Stephen Cardinal Hamao of Japan, or His Eminence, Francis Cardinal Arinze of Nigeria, would be).
Another factor would be that of the age of the candidate. While some media jesters have said that the current conclave will choose a “caretaker” Pontiff, I think all of the voting cardinals remember that the last time their predecessors voted for a safe “caretaker”, they got His Holiness, Pope John XXIII and the Second Vatican Council. They may by now have figured out, as has the cartoon character, Rocket J. Squirrel, that “That trick never works!”
I suspect also that in the back of their minds also are
The Prophesy of St. Malachy. For those unaware of
the Prophesy, the twelth century Irish monk and Saint Malachy wrote a long poem in Latin in which he gave figurative names for all of the popes of the next fourteen centuries. According to his reckoning, there are two popes left: the one to be elected in a month, and the last, whom Malachy named
Petrus Romanus, and of whom Malachy said that during the latter’s reign the world would end, and the dread Judge appear. What with the tendency towards apocalyptic that a number of people have been willing to entertain (including his late Holiness), I think that the voting cardinals would be loath to tempt fate and vote for a candidate in his late 70s.
More seriously, however, all but three of the voting cardinals were chosen as cardinals by his late Holiness. One way or another, they are all Karol Wojtyla’s men, and I believe that regardless of theological bent, whether modernist, traditionalist or true followers of Vatican II, they are perhaps more willing to vote for younger men than their predecessors would.
When one combines this with the fact that his late Holiness in effect “stacked the deck” of voting Cardinals by adding twenty-nine cardinals to the list, and the fact that the mean age of these new cardinals is about 62, this may indicate a wish on the part of his late Holiness to have a relatively young successor.
When one also combines the above considerations with the fact that the younger Cardinals are extraordinarily qualified to succeed his late Holiness, it leads me to think that the younger voting Cardinals are at least worthy of more consideration by the faithful. I therefore provide the names of the sixteen youngest Cardinals (all 65 or younger), with links to brief biographies provided by
www.catholic-pages.com:
Pell, George (P) 63* (Australia)
Schonborn, Christoph (P) 60 (Austria)
Putjik, Vinco (P) 59 (Bosnia)
Quellet, Marc (P) 60* (Canada)
Bozanic, Josif (P) 56 (Croatia)
Barbarin, Philippe (P) 54* (France)
Tauran, Jean-Louis, (D) 61* (France)
Turkson, Peter Kodwo Appiah (P) 56* (Ghana)
Rodriguez Maradiaga, Oscar Andres (P) 62 (Honduras)
Erdo, Peter (P) 52* (Hungary)
Toppo, Telesphore Placidus (P) 65* (India)
Scola, Angelo (P) 63* (Italy)
Sepe, Crescenzio (D) 61 (Italy)
Grocholewski, Zenon (D) 65 (Poland)
Napier, Wilfrid Fox (P) 64 (South Africa)
Zubeir Wako, Gabriel (P) 64 * (Sudan)
(Note that for this list, (P) means Cardinal Priest, (D) means Cardinal Deacon, the number refers to the cardinal’s age, and the presence of the asterix (*) indicates whether the Cardinal was elected during the 2003 Consistory).
I realize that by this standard, at least two worthy papal candidates (and two of my favorites),
Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, at age 77, and
Francis Cardinal Arinze, at age 72, would be excluded. This is rather a pity, but I have long ago given up the delusion that my wishes are the same as the promptings of the Holy Spirit, or that I really know who is going to be elected. I simply put forth my reasonings, and suggest that reporters may not have thought things through sufficiently, or examined sufficient information.
What I have also noted, in the last four papal elections, is that priority has been given to those with considerable education in sacred studies, with fluency in many languages, and with experience in working in council with other bishops and cardinals. If that standard is applied, then of all of sixteen named above, in my opinion, the one with the most qualifications would be his Eminence, Christoph Cardinal Schonborn. In addition to his education, he is noted as both the secretary for and the primary author of that monumental work,
The Catechism of the Catholic Church. In that capacity, he worked with groups of Italian, French, Spanish, German, and English speaking bishops in the drafting and editing of the
Catechism.Of course, in order to assist in the writing of the
Catechism, Cardinal Schonborn would have to be expert in Sacred Scripture, Patrology, Church History, Ethics, Moral Philosophy, and Systematic Theology. The fact that he is both a Dominican and an Eastern Catholic bishop, with knowledge of Orthodox Liturgy, Theology, and Spirtuality, does not hurt him, at least in my eyes. It might even help in Roman Catholic attempts at reunion with Orthodoxy. At least he would have a better idea than most as to what would be involved.
Again, I have no idea as to who will actually be elected. As stated in scripture as regards the election of David as King of Israel, as opposed to all his older brothers, humankind does not see with the eyes of the Holy Spirit. I am merely indulging in a
Gedankexperiment, or thought experiment, (which is more than can be said for what most of our media jesters are doing). I will be happy to await the decision of the Holy Spirit, as expressed through the vote of our spiritual leaders.
