Crossroads -- After Francis, another "executive order" papacy?

With Catholics divided on worship and doctrine, it's hard to find unity

Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio was many things to many people, which is one reason that he was able to become Pope Francis.

In the past, the cardinal’s actions convinced many that he was a conservative on doctrine, while others believed he was a progressive who could reform the church. He was from Argentina, but from an Italian family. Supporters stressed that he was from South America, while he maintained strong ties to Catholic leaders in Europe. He was a Jesuit that, during several key moments in his life, clashed with the Jesuits.

Above all, Francis preached dialogue and “synodality,” but promoted (and protected) his allies while punishing his most powerful critics. Under his orders, the Vatican often hinted at major changes — with a vague footnote, a blunt quotation to reporters or documents that served as ecclesiastical executive orders.

In the end, he appointed 108 of the 135 cardinal electors who will select the next occupant of the Chair of St. Peter.

As always, journalists view this process through the lens of partisan politics. Meanwhile, wise Vatican watchers roll their eyes and quote the familiar wisdom: “He who enters a conclave a pope, leaves it a cardinal.”

During this week’s “Crossroads” podcast, I argued that the key — in post-Francis Catholicism — is to focus less on the NAMES of possible candidates and more on the CAMPS from which candidates might emerge. If Francis was a man who drew support from a variety of Catholic tribes, it is likely that this will need to happen again in a tense church with many painful divisions.

Will the next pope be from the liberal, declining, but well-connected churches of Europe or will he be a relative newcomer from the Global South? OK, what about a cardinal from a land far from Europe (think Asia) who is popular with the establishment? Maybe the next pope will emerge from the growing churches of Africa? That makes sense, except that Africans frequently clashed with Francis and many older leaders there have close ties to St. Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI.

Through it all, the Francis team worked — in subtle ways, of course — for changes to modernize worship, as well as pastoral policies on marriage, divorce and sexuality.

Writing for UnHerd, “Thomas of Celano (a “Catholic priest who wishes to remain anonymous”), produced an essay on “The Mystery of Pope Francis.” Here is a typical blast of complex background material:

The men promoted by Francis raised eyebrows. … Several unknowns were made cardinals, and have remained unknown ever since. Consider his pick for the Vatican’s doctrinal chief, an undistinguished Argentine cleric called Víctor Manuel Fernández. His previous writings, particularly a book on the theology of kissing, were found to be rather embarrassing. In diplomacy, meanwhile, matters were left in the hands of Cardinal Parolin, who oversaw a secret treaty with the Chinese government allowing the CCP to appoint Catholic bishops, an unheard-of usurpation of the Church’s independence in the modern age. This move was bitterly criticised by the former bishop of Hong Kong, Cardinal Zen, who could only meet the Pope in a public audience. Like so many others who had concerns about the Church’s direction, he was refused a private audience.

Yet if changing the Church irreversibly was indeed Francis’s aim, the plan seemed to falter by the end of the papacy. In December 2023, Cardinal Fernández, with the Pope’s approval, published a document that allowed for the blessing of gay couples, albeit in deliberately ambiguous language. The reaction was immediate. Conservatives fumed at the thought of the Church blessing sin; many had always suspected the thrust of the Bergoglio papacy was to liberalise Church teaching on homosexuality, and this seemed proof of that. Most importantly, though, the African bishops rose up and condemned the document.

The bottom line: The big question is whether the doctrinal DNA of Francis will emerge among the many lesser-known men that he appointed from smaller, less-connected dioceses and archdiocese around the world.

In other words, this choice would come from the ranks of cardinals that team Francis found on “the margins” of Catholic life. But it’s appropriate to ask: Do Catholics from growing churches in the Global South (especially Africa and Asia) want major changes in worship and doctrine? There may be surprises there.

After working my way through nearly 10 lists of potential candidates (please see this offering from Religion Unplugged editor Clemente Lisi), I drew up a list of “camps” among the “papabile” (Italian for “pope-able” cardinals.

The key is to look for specific cardinals who fit into two or more of these camps.

* “Francis” men: The key name here, in all of the press lists, is the young Cardinal Luis Tagle of the Philippines who many call the “Asian Francis.” Is the press buzz the result of a lobbying effort from team Francis?

* Vatican diplomats and insiders: The big name here is Cardinal Pietro Parolin, the Vatican Secretary of State. It’s interesting to see Cardinal Parolin’s name in many of the articles about the circle of St. Galen Mafia insiders who helped promote Cardinal Bergoglio. Hold that thought.

* Global South leaders: Especially the waves of new cardinals selected by team Francis from little-known corners of the church. So, Tagle would be a “Francis” man, residing in multiple camps. That’s important.

* “Traditionalists”: See the Africans.

* The Africans: See the “traditionalists.” Many lists include the powerful (and 79-year-old) Cardinal Robert Sarah of Guinea. He clashed frequently with Pope Francis and paid the price, as someone who was close to John Paul II and Benedict. But might Sarah help a younger African step forward?

* Italians and Europeans: See the Vatican diplomats and insiders.

In conclusion, the cardinals linked to Francis need to find a successor who will be open to more “dialogue,” but perhaps with a calmer style than the sound-bite and “executive order” approach of this papacy.

But one can assume that the reporters who are enamored with Cardinal Tagle might be hearing from the St. Galen’s Mafia 3.0. They may be bold enough to back a young (in Vatican terms) and talented progressive who can define an era.

What do those lobbying conversations sound like?

Maybe something like this, from a 2013 address (“Who is Pope Francis?”) by the fallen cardinal, Theodore McCarrick, a legendary networker behind closed doors. Look here for the YouTube and here for a transcript, via Roma Locuta Est transcript.

McCarrick claims that he was asked (by a savvy Vatican insider) to use his connections to support the cause of the cardinal who would become Pope Francis. Here is the key language:

… [The influential Italian] said, ‘What about Bergoglio?’ …

I said, ‘What about him?’

He said, ‘Does he have a chance?’

I said, ‘I don’t think so, because no one has mentioned his name. He hasn’t been in anyone’s mind. I don’t think it’s on anybody’s mind to vote for him.’

He said, ‘He could do it, you know.’

I said, ‘What could he do?’

He said, ‘[Bergoglio] could reform the Church. If we gave him five years, he could put us back on target.’

I said, ‘But, he’s 76.’

He said, ‘Yeah, five years. If we had five years, the Lord working through Bergoglio in five years could make the Church over again.’

Stay tuned.

Enjoy the podcast and, please, share it with others.