Papal Conclave Bettor's Guide: Part I, Qualifications

Like most Catholics, there are few things I love more than the pope and one of them is gambling. Though betting on the pope seems like a sure ticket to hell, St. Louis priests were found betting on the 2005 papal conclave and the Catholic League said they had no problem with it. So, in light of many bookies taking bets on the coming conclave, here’s a guide to cashing in on the next Vatican leader. Today I’ll talk about what it takes to be Supreme Pontiff; in a few days, we’ll get upload a guide for specific candidates.
Cardinal
In theory, the only absolute requirement for becoming pope is a Y chromosome. Non-Catholic males even could immediately agree to be baptized, ordained a priest, consecrated as a bishop and then appointed pope. In practice, all modern popes have come from the College of Cardinals (sorry Bono). More precisely, a cardinal deacon hasn’t been elected since 769; popes are chosen from the six cardinal bishops and the cardinal priests. Those 80 and over are ineligible to vote; this effectively makes them unelectable, and indeed they never have been.
Foreign Languages
No doctrine requires it, but it’s helpful for the pope to be fluent in a number of languages: Italian is essentially required, while Latin, Greek, German, French, Spanish, English, and Portuguese are strongly recommended. The most recent popes have known all of these languages and more—not a small ask of any candidate. For this conclave, Italian, English, and Spanish can all be considered “musts” given the current Church dynamics; it’s unlikely that a cardinal without Latin literacy would be trusted as the intellectual leader, either.
Conservative
In his Angels & Demons, Dan Brown points out the “three C’s” of becoming pope: conservative, conservative, and conservative. This hasn’t always been true, but it will be this time. Since the death of influential Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini, no liberal cardinals remain; Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI have consistently appointed cardinals on the right-end of doctrine. Even in prior conclaves with liberal majorities, conservative cardinals have held fast in preventing any liberal candidate from receiving the necessary two-thirds plus one vote. Betting-wise, this won’t help you eliminate any options—again, every single cardinal is conservative—but progressive Catholics should probably watch the conclave with tempered hopes; support for condoms, female priests, or same-sex marriage could kill any candidacy.
While a conservative pope will be elected, there’s still variation among different candidates. A lot of this has to do with tone: e.g., do you condemn homosexuality by calling it “wrong” or saying “allowing it to exist causes child sex abuse, so let’s stigmatize it”? My guess is that more moderate conservatives will win out on this one, as vocally conservative leaders tend to scare off potential converts and some questioning members.
No Superpower
Cardinals have occasionally mentioned something to the extent of “we don’t want to elect a pope from a superpower.” Translation: No American cardinal—they have enough influence already. While many might want outspoken Cardinal Dolan of New York, even he’s said people thinking he has a chance are “smoking marijuana.” Rumors within Rome say Boston Cardinal O’Malley might have a chance as a noncontroversial compromise candidate; there’s probably more likely compromise elsewhere, given his American, Capuchin, and sex-scandal baggage. In the future, this could change; U.S. Catholics donate more to the Vatican than any other group, but that might not get them represented for a while yet.
The Americans are of interest, nonetheless. Out of the 117 electors, 11 are American, second in number only to Italians. Cardinals from the same country have a tendency to vote together, so the American cardinals could tilt the balance towards a candidate of their choice. Along with traditional concerns over abortion and government influence, this group needs a pope who’ll fight against secular influence; this suggests a European, especially Italians such a Cardinal Scola and Cardinal Piacenza.
Religious Orders
Plenty of popes have come from religious orders, just not anytime lately. Whether Somascan, Franciscan, Capuchin, or what have you, there’s some division and old hostilities between orders that makes it difficult. Popes have to be seen as uniting figures, not focused on any particular order’s niche.
Of the many papabili (the rumored favorites), there are several Salesians of Don Bosco and a Dominican (Austrian Cardinal Schönborn).  Most notably, Italian Cardinal Bertone is a Salesian; he’s a viable contender. Though not perhaps an aid to his candidacy, many orders deviate from traditional Church teaching more than Salesians do. It could very well be that there haven’t been any popes from a religious order as of late merely due to the decline of various orders; still, certain orders seem to have little chance of electing a pope (e.g., Jesuits).

Minority
From Cardinal Arinze of Nigeria to Cardinal Turkson of Ghana, there’s been a lot of speculation that we might have the first minority pope. It’d be a great PR move for an institution known for representing old white guys, but cardinals seem mostly concerned with doctrine and internal power struggles. A minority candidate could nonetheless be chosen, but I doubt it’d be due to their minority status.
However, most minority cardinals come from either South America or Africa—the ones from elsewhere don’t stand much chance at all of being elected. Many South American cardinals sympathize with liberation theology, which reconciles Jesus’ teachings with Marxism and other revolutionary political movements. Such teachings are far out of the mainstream of the current College and would possibly hinder South American cardinals. Similarly, African cardinals have generally been soft on condoms, at times even suggesting their use could be acceptable. This issue isn’t quite the third rail that others are, but could raise concerns among more conservative-minded cardinals.
Italians
From 1523-1978, every pope was Italian; Pope John Paul II even made great efforts to convince Italians that he was one of their own. Though the past two conclaves have shown an unusual lack of discipline among the Italian cardinals, you have to wonder whether they’re itching to elect one of their own; on the other hand, they no longer represent nearly as large a portion of the College as they used to. 28 Italian cardinals qualify to enter the conclave—not enough to stop another candidate alone, but still just less than a fourth of the conclave. The days of consistently electing Italians are long gone and no other nationality wields near the same power.
If no Italian rises from the group, however, their vote will probably weigh heavily still. With the past two popes of Polish and German origin, it seems other Europeans may stand a chance to receive the Italian vote. Though no non-Italian European sticks out, Cardinal Erdő of Hungary and Cardinal Llovera of Spain would be the most likely choices. Recall, however, that John Paul II was elected in this manner and by no means a known contender.
Factions
If you take this account at face value, the 2005 conclave—the only one which any of the currently voting-eligible cardinals have participated in—saw a divide between Westerners/some Italians, Eastern Europe/some Italians, and everyone else. Many accounts are quite different, but the general idea holds: factions will form. Whichever faction first appeases another could get their candidate elected, or perhaps a secondary choice from within their faction.
In the last conclave, this wasn’t quite as big of an issue. John Paul II instituted reforms that let a simple majority vote chose a pope after some conditions were met, but Benedict XVI rescinded these changes. Without this majority tactic, it’s possible Benedict XVI wouldn’t have been pope but instead compromise would have been forced. If something similar happens again, it’s possible a generally noncontroversial choice arises—someone unforeseeable at this point.
It appears a faction will gather behind Cardinal Turkson (representing “other” countries), another behind Cardinal Scola or another Italian Cardinal (representing many Italians and some Europeans), and another behind Cardinal Ouellet (representing North America and some Europeans). It’s quite likely that all of these factions could collapse or never come into being at all, but the best hope for a quick conclave would be one of these groups quickly getting their candidate elected. Otherwise, cardinals who’ve served in the Vatican—thus having been in regular contact with much of the College—stand to benefit.
Rape Scandals
A lot of popes have been elected with questionable records. Benedict XVI, for example, was part of the Hitler Youth (albeit unwillingly). Nonetheless, involvement in the recent rape scandals will be a non-starter. Cardinal Mahony of Los Angeles has already been encouraged to skip the conclave after last month being stripped of his duties for covering up pedophilia rape cases; other involved cardinals stand little chance of election.
Even cardinals with admirable handling of the cases, however, might be passed over. Why? Simply, no one’s perfect. No matter how noble one’s intentions might have been, even slight errors in investigations could be devastating to the Church’s image. Fears of future discovery of such errors might keep cardinals away from any involved candidate. More likely, a cardinal who was publicly concerned with the sexual abuse reports but not involved in the investigations might solve some of the church’s PR issues.
Respected
Like any other election, no candidate can win without some actual skill. This could come in a lot of forms. Some cardinals are particularly knowledgeable about doctrine; others have held influential positions and led effectively; others are simply well liked among the laity and their colleagues. Most cardinals can be credited with one of the three, and surely all of those being discussed for the papacy. Even dark horses would need some sort of appeal as to why they could serve effectively as pope.
Figuring out which special quality will get someone elected seems difficult. Recent conclaves have turned out those known as authorities on doctrine, perhaps the ultimate role of the pope. I’d expect this trend to continue, though it wouldn’t be entirely shocking to see a figurehead who’d let others deal with doctrine on his behalf—there’s been some grumblings that Benedict XVI wasn’t the energetic leader the Church needed.
Age
There’s a reason you can’t enter the conclave if you’re above 80: it’s generally a bad to elect someone who’ll be in office for only a year or two. Similarly, electing a pope that’ll live too long, like John Paul II did, gives a single man excessive influence over the future of the Church. Generally, a cardinal in his mid-60’s to mid-70’s is seen as ideal.
Recently, however, there’s been a trend among the College. Excluding the unexpectedly short reign of John Paul I, the College has rotated between picking a relatively young candidate and one nearing 80. Perhaps this is merely a coincidence and shows that the College doesn’t care about age, but there’s a reasonable chance that it’s a continued overreaction to the last pope’s long/short tenure.
If this trend continues, the next pope is due to be relatively young. This could make sense; as the College is made up of generally conservative cardinals, they may wish to elect a younger conservative to ensure a long period of conservative Church doctrine. In the end, mid-60’s to mid-70’s seems like a good rule of thumb.
Benedict’s Influence
Theories as to why Benedict XVI is retiring abound. Past papal retirements have generally indicated scandal or other questionable behavior, but I generally take Benedict at his word—he’s old, tired, and unable to keep leading. Reports have even indicated he’s going blind and losing weight, so he’s probably taking the honorable step of making sure we don’t have a physically disabled pope for who knows how long.
Nonetheless, his influence could swing the election. Publicly, he’s announced his desire to disappear from public view as soon as possible and enjoy retirement. If, however, he makes some private indications of a preferred successor, we have no idea what influence that could have; it might be great or minimal. My guess is that he’s gracefully exiting—his appointments to powerful positions wield plenty of influence over the process, anyways.
Papabili Curse
There’s an old saying that “he who enters the conclave as a pope leaves a cardinal.” It’s true; while there’s no official list of papabili, only half of the popes elected since 1829 were seen as likely contenders. Thus, don’t be surprised if a dark horse no one’s been talking walks onto the Balcony post-conclave. All of the above speculation is truly nothing more than speculation; the next pope likely won’t deviate too far from the precedents established over the past several conclaves, but I’d be more surprised to see a perfect fit that a slight mismatch. Especially given the new, technology-driven era we’re living in, old maxims seem to grow old rather quickly. While you can take it to the bank that there won’t be a young, liberal-minded Jesuit, the above are all probabilistic guidelines.  Thanks to rules that “what happens in the conclave, stays in the conclave,” a lot of forecasting might be based on false assumptions. Perhaps a better means of predicting is looking at the cardinals themselves—to be posted in the next couple of days.