A Geopolitical Conclave in the Vatican

Many observers agree that the conclave, which opened in Rome on May 7 to choose a successor to Pope Francis, is likely to be a "geopolitical" conclave. What does this mean?

First, there is the profile of the late pope: the positions taken by the former archbishop of Buenos Aires illustrated a sensitivity characteristic of the Global South. He consistently displayed an attitude of mistrust toward old Europe and the West. Faced with Russia's aggression against Ukraine, he did not hesitate to urge Ukrainians to give in, nor did he fail to accuse the Atlantic Alliance, in line with the positions of the Global South, of being the source of the conflict. On Gaza, he used the word "genocide" against the Israelis: no pontiff could have supported the Hebrew state in the current circumstances, but it is doubtful that a "traditional" pope would have used such language.

We interviewed the renowned historian of the contemporary Church, Emma Fattorini, author of a landmark book on Pius XI, Hitler and Mussolini (2007). Professor Fattorini draws a striking parallel with John Paul II: the pope who came from the East helped to shake the foundations of Soviet communism. He believed in a strong and reunified Europe. Like Francis, he was not a progressive in matters of morals. Pope Francis wanted to reorient the Church in a North-South direction, appointing a large number of cardinals from Africa, Asia, and Latin America, and undertaking numerous trips to the Church’s "peripheries," while largely avoiding old Europe.

We might add Ulaanbaatar and Tehran, where Catholics are far from numerous. When Francis recently visited France, he went to Marseille and then Ajaccio-both on the Mediterranean coast. He did not go to Paris or Lyon. This was to maintain a "popular religiosity" that he fundamentally opposed to the decadent character of the traditional European elites.

His target audience was the part of the Church he considered the most vibrant-and also the most numerous-particularly in Africa. One could say that Pope Francis was an "anti-Western" pope, just as John Paul II had been an anti-Soviet one. In contrast, Francis signed and renewed an agreement with China granting Beijing a role in the co-nomination of Chinese bishops-one of the most controversial elements of his legacy within the College of Cardinals. One trait he shared with John Paul II was their strong centralizing tendencies: both pontiffs sidelined the Vatican’s diplomatic apparatus, which had reached its zenith during the era of Ostpolitik (notably the Helsinki Process)

In light of the direction Pope Francis set for the Church, the Conclave will inevitably have to ask: should we continue in this direction or not? Another major factor is also likely to give the choice of the future pope a geopolitical dimension: namely, the emergence of Trumpism, with its strange Catholic wing - once animated by Steve Bannon (a non-practicing Catholic), now embodied by the formidable Mr. Vance, the vice president who converted to Catholicism a few years ago.

MAGA Catholicism

The threat posed by Trumpian Catholicism, from the perspective of "classical" post-Vatican II Catholicism, operates on three levels. Financially, in a Church whose finances are as compromised as ever, MAGA Catholics can gain significant influence -at least in the medium term- by investing, for example, in key institutions for the training of future prelates. Ideologically, J.D. Vance promotes a heterodox theory-ordo amoris-which justifies anti-immigration policies through the (supposedly Augustinian) claim that charity must begin with those closest to us, and only later extend, in concentric circles, to strangers. This thesis was strongly opposed by Pope Francis in his letter to the bishops of the United States of America, in which he highlighted the parable of the Good Samaritan.

Finally, on a geopolitical level,we might envision a dynamic that Olivier Roy, a leading expert on religion, describes in a fascinating interview with Le Nouvel Observateur as an "alliance of anti-woke values between America, Russia, Modi's India, and Milei's Argentina, against a decadent and woke Europe." According to the professor, now based in Florence and close to certain circles in Rome, "within this strategy, regaining control of the Catholic Church is essential to giving a soul to this coalition and turning it into a tool of influence in the Global South-above all, to avoid facing a competitor on the values market."

Naturally, one may raise reservations about this analysis- it is far from clear that Mr. Vance can exert decisive influence over his own national Church. On migration issues, American bishops have stood in direct opposition to Trump. What does seem indisputable, however, is that Pope Francis’s unvarnished voice was one of the few-and certainly the most powerful-to be heard on the global stage in opposition to the great ideological hullabaloo of Donald Trump and his epigones. Will the same be true of his successor?

Though denounced as "woke" by some, Pope Francis-beyond a few bold gestures that quickly met their limits (such as the blessing of same-sex couples, strongly contested in Africa in particular)-remained conservative on moral values: his condemnation of abortion employed language of unusual harshness. Finally, as Olivier Roy also points out, beyond questions of geopolitics and doctrine, "the pope’s positions have been expressed on a different axis-not liberalism versus conservatism, but charity versus normativity (the heart rather than the law)." As a corollary, he systematically emphasized pastoral virtues over managerial competence in the prelates he promoted (80% of the cardinal-electors were appointed by Francis)-which may well be the lasting image of him that the Conclave retains.

Habebimus papam (we will have a pope)

In the end, who will succeed Pope Francis? It is especially difficult to say given that today's Church is marked by multiple divisions and that most of the cardinals do not know each other. The debates held during the "general congregations" preceding the conclave may therefore carry real weight.

It is likely that the members of the conclave will favor a certain stability, especially since Pope Francis has launched many initiatives that are still in the air, such as the central theme of "synodality" and the women’s place in the Church. On another level, it is difficult to imagine a "low-profile" pope; the cardinals are surely aware of the importance of how important it is for the next pontiff to have a presence in today’s omnipresent media landscape.

Could another pope from the Global South succeed the Argentine pontiff? It is certainly possible, given the number of Southern cardinals appointed by Pope Francis: among the electors, 65 now come from Africa, Asia, Latin America, Oceania, or the Middle East, compared to 70 from the West, including 53 Europeans. When reviewing the list of "papabili" published by the press-or on the remarkable (and conservative-leaning) website The College of Cardinals Report-few cardinals from the Global South appear to embody the "bridge-building" qualities that the conclave might seek to overcome its divisions. There may be exceptions, including Cardinal Luis Antonio Tagle, the former archbishop of Manila, who has held high office in the Roman Curia since 2019, thus ticking many boxes; or, to take another example, Cardinal Fernando Chomali, archbishop of Santiago, Chile, who is leading with great charisma the rebuilding of a national Church taken over by sexual abuse.

Is a return to an Italian pope possible? Or to a "Mediterranean" pope to take into account the Archbishop of Marseille, Jean-Marc Aveline, and the Maltese Mario Grech, the driving force behind the "synod on synodality"? This would be our favored hypothesis, precisely because the "capacity for synthesis" is the traditional strength of Italian prelates. Among them, the names of Mgr Parolin, Francis' right-hand man in recent years as Secretary of State, and Matteo Maria Zuppi, Archbishop of Bologna, are often mentioned. It is significant that a trio is currently the target of attacks by certain conservative clans in the media: Tagle, Parolin, and Zuppi.

A resident of Jerusalem since 1990, speaking Hebrew but a staunch defender of the Palestinians in their current suffering, Pizzaballa would represent a very "geopolitical" choice-and one that would certainly be received as such in the MAGA sphere.

Copyright image : Andreas SOLARO / AFP
Two cardinals (Frank Leo of Canada and John Atcherley Dew of New Zealand) and a Swiss Guard at the Vatican on April 29.