Though cardinals are supposed to vote based on divine inspiration, voting for the pope has always been secular. Lots of factors come into play, and without polls for the likes of Nate Silver to work their magic on, it’s anybody’s guess as to whose coming next. While I don’t plan to contribute to the one of the largest non-sports betting markets, here’s a final prediction of some specific papabili:
No chance: All Americans (not happening), Francis Arinze (too old), All Asians/Pacific Islanders/Australians/South Americans (neither large, disciplined voting blocs nor any noteworthy candidates), Norberto Rivera Carrera (too political), Leonardo Sandri (cardinal deacon). While this list includes a lot of worthy candidates, too much distance from the Vatican prevents a cardinal from developing personal relationships with other cardinals; a handful of those specifically listed have some of those relationships, but lack in some other regard.
Long Shots: Péter Erdő, Antonio Cañizares Llovera. A compromise on either of these would signal the true collapse of the Italians as a united bloc; Erdő would mean a European faction won out, Llovera that a Latino one did. Crazier things have happened, but usually they don’t. Erdő is probably too young and lacking in Vatican experience to be elected, so between the two, the Llovera has a better shot of pulling off the upset.
The Dark Horse: Christoph Schönborn. He’s the most liberal of the papabili, albeit a conservative still. In a lot of respects, he’s nearly perfect: intellectual heavy weight, confidant of Benedict XVI, similarities to John Paul II, intolerant of pedophilia, Catechism editor, able to lead church into the new world, and so forth. I’m guessing liberal Italians and other Europeans might rally around him in early rounds, but there’s just too much working against him. Already a Dominican who’s questioned the need for celibacy, he recently reinstated a priest who was ousted as gay. He’d be a major player if he was more conservative or the College were less so, but those aren’t the realities of the situation.
Trendy Pick: Peter Turkson. He’s been the synod of Africa, representing a chance for the Church to extend its influence to a still developing continent, and might have the most star power of any cardinal—he has the ability to communicate the Church’s message in such a way that most can’t. As an African, he still probably lacks the friends needed to get elected and focuses on issues that aren’t as important to Europeans cardinals. Furthermore, he has a tendency to cause controversy by saying something he really shouldn’t and has taken some moderate positions on condoms. The past few weeks in the spotlight, during which Turkson has made homophobic remarks and talked about his desire to be pope, might have shown the world that he’s not ready to lead the Vatican.
Boring Choice: Marc Ouellet. A conservative Canadian known for his social work, he’s got the powerful position as prefect of the Congregation of Bishops and is the president of the Pontifical Commission for Latin America. He’s done nothing to disqualify himself for the role, and rumors that he might decline the position only boost his chances. At the same time, he’s done nothing to set himself apart and lacks a powerful constituency to unite behind him; even other cardinals have claimed his sermons are sleep-inducing. Definitely has a chance to be the one pushed through when no one else is, a la a Benedict circa 2005.
Wildcard: The Italians. Everything’s going to come down as to whether their factions try to unite, and if so, whether they can come up with a single candidate—perhaps even a non-Italian candidate. Half a dozen are more qualified than the average candidate, and another half dozen are fully qualified and could step in as “compromise” candidates. At the same time, there’s a chance that the rest of the world is not so hot on the idea on more Italians; a changing world may desire more diverse leaders. I’m guessing there’s a better than 50% chance that an Italian is elected, but God only knows which one. The following all seem to have reasonable chances, from most to least likely:
Frontrunner: Angelo Scola. He might be the perfect candidate, but that’s going to work against him. An intellectual conservative from humble origins, Scola’s a theologian and philosopher in his own right and one of the smartest members of the College. He’s has held several powerful positions in the Church and served well. He’s going to face the brunt of the anti-Italian sentiment, and I don’t know if he’s got the personal connections to unite a faction without a popular number two on his side.
Powerplayers: Angelo Bagnasco, Tarcisio Bertone. Bagnasco’s been elected as the President of the Italian Episcopal Conference, a definite signal that he’s popular among Italian cardinals (he’s got no shortage of other connections either). Though called perhaps too conservative for the College, that’s not the worst label to have. Bertone is a skilled politician and the Vatican Secretary of State. While wielding great influence over the Italian electors, he’s only hampered by a lacking popularity among the cardinals and potency for scandal—it doesn’t help that he’d complete the “Prophecy of the Popes,” which the Church denounce as heresy. Between the two, I don’t see a great chance of either becoming the Italian choice (better chance for Bagnasco), but both would be a powerful advocate for someone else.
Smart Money: Gianfranco Ravasi. He’s the President of the Pontifical Council for Culture and widely known as having papal ambitions. When Benedict XVI named him to preach at the weeklong Lenten retreat, insiders read it as an endorsement; it’s a great honor that the last couple popes have done before election. Though connected and theological enough for election, he might not be liked enough among the cardinals; an impressive week of preaching at the retreat could overcome that.
Remember the Name: Angelo Amato, Mauro Piacenza, Crescenzio Sepe. None has any particularly attractive qualities or any particularly damaging ones. They’re all simply conservative, 68-74 year old Italian cardinals with all the foreign language qualifications—enough to warrant some attention.
In the end, it’s rumored that both the Italian cardinals and the Latin American cardinals aren’t uniting around any single candidate. While it’s hard to bet against odds on favorite Scola, I think this is going to come down to finding a compromise candidate who fits all the needed qualities of a pope—especially someone that’s well-known and unanimously respected. After early rounds of voting that will divide multiple Europeans versus Turkson and potentially a South American, I like the Canadian Marc Ouellet; his role in the Vatican gives him strong ties there and his work in Latin America could help him become a second choice for them. If the seventeen North American voters unite behind him early on, it might be clear to all groups that he’s a fair compromise. As a long shot for those of you who actually want betting advice, Cardinal Llovera (going off currently at 66-1) seems like good value; he fits nearly all the qualifications that Ouellet does, but is Spanish as opposed to Canadian. Nonetheless, given all the craziness and discussion that arises from the week or so the cardinals will spend together pre-conclave, campaigning has just begun—anything could happen.
© 2024 Harvard Political Review. All rights reserved.