Real Clear Politics  /  Real Clear Religion
originally published in the Wall Street Journal
 
 
 
 Updated April 14, 2013, 6:29 a.m. ET 
Fifteen Days in Rome: How the Pope Was Picked 
The inside story: From the Red Room where Bergoglio's name was  first 
dropped to a faithful night on Rome's Piazza Navona 

 
 
By _STACY MEICHTRY_ 
(http://online.wsj.com/search/term.html?KEYWORDS=STACY+MEICHTRY&bylinesearch=true)
  and _ALESSANDRA GALLONI_ 
(http://online.wsj.com/search/term.html?KEYWORDS=ALESSANDRA+GALLONI&bylinesearch=true)
  

 
 
On Feb. 27, a mild, dewy morning, Alitalia Flight 681 landed at Leonardo da 
 Vinci airport in Rome after 13 hours in the air. A balding man with 
gray-white  wisps of thin hair stepped out of coach class. He wore thick-rimmed 
brown  glasses, black orthopedic shoes and a dark overcoat. He had a slight 
limp, and  his back was stiff from the long flight. His belly was a bit 
swollen, due to  many decades of cortisone treatments to help him breathe after 
he 
had lost part  of a lung as a young man. No one could see the silver 
pectoral cross he wore  under his coat, though it was the symbol of his 
authority.
 
Back home in Buenos Aires, Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio was a prominent  
figure, the highest-ranking Catholic prelate in his country and to many a  
beloved figure known especially for his work in the city's teeming slums. 
Here  he was one of 115 cardinals converging on Vatican City for important 
business:  the election of a new leader for the Catholic Church.  
Two weeks earlier, Pope Benedict XVI had suddenly announced his resignation 
 from office, becoming the first pontiff in 600 years to renounce a job  
traditionally held until death. In church teaching, the position had been 
handed  down for two millennia, starting when Jesus said to St. Peter, "On this 
rock I  will build my church." 
Cardinal Bergoglio expected his trip to be brief. He was already carrying 
in  his black leather briefcase the airplane ticket that would return him 
home in  time for Holy Week, the most important week of the year for a Catholic 
prelate.  His Easter Sunday homily was already written too, and in the 
hands of  parishioners back home. 
The Argentine prelate checked into the Domus Internationalis Paulus VI 
hotel  for priests. Named after Catholicism's 1960s "pilgrim pope" and housed 
in 
a  17th- and 18th-century stone palazzo that once served as a Jesuit 
college, the  Domus is a modest affair. The floors are made of marble, but the 
rooms are  sparsely furnished. Meals are served in a cafeteria-style hall 
decorated with  large paintings of Biblical scenes.  
What drew Cardinal Bergoglio to the Domus was its location. Positioned 
right  in the heart of Rome, near its busiest byways and cafes, the hotel is 
across the  Tiber River and quite a distance from Vatican City. That allowed 
for long walks  over cobblestone piazzas and bridges, past peddlers, street 
performers and  throngs of tourists, as he commuted to the General 
Congregation, the secret  deliberations being held inside Vatican City in the 
days 
before the conclave  began on March 12. In his dark overcoat covering his 
pectoral cross, he blended  in with the crowd. He didn't wear his red 
cardinal's 
hat, instead letting his  wispy white hair flutter in the wind and rain.
 
Though the public paid little notice to Cardinal Bergoglio, his name had 
made  the rounds among a small group of cardinals who had descended upon Rome 
from  different parts of the globe to choose a new pope. Though he had drawn 
support  in 2005, in 2013 he was definitely a dark-horse candidate. There 
were a dozen or  so more high-profile cardinals regarded as papabili, or 
"popeables,"  being touted in headlines world-wide as possible successors to 
Pope Benedict.  These men, who included Cardinals Timothy Dolan of New York and 
Angelo Scola of  Milan, were accompanied by assistants and journalists. 
They quickly became the  toast of the town, attending sumptuous private dinners 
with fellow cardinals and  kissing babies at Mass before batteries of TV 
cameras. Their crimson vestments,  golden pectoral crosses and sizable 
entourages stood out.
 
The Italian cardinals were chauffeured to and from the walled confines of  
Vatican City in jet black Mercedes marked with Holy See license plates. They 
 were greeted as "Your Eminence" whenever they set foot inside the city's 
best  trattorias. The Americans tooled around Rome in white minivans and 
lodged at the  sprawling Pontifical North American College, a seminary nestled 
on a hill just  above the Vatican. 
Inside the Synod Hall of the General Congregation, however, the cardinals  
blended into one red-hued assembly. Erected in the postwar era, the space is 
 distinguished among Vatican architecture for its lack of majesty. Its 
uniformly  beige interior is as sterile as a community college lecture hall. 
Eight years  earlier, when they gathered in the same room after the death of 
John Paul II,  the princes of the church had mainly looked for a candidate who 
could guarantee  doctrinal continuity with the late Polish pope. But Pope 
Benedict's resignation  had opened the door to a flurry of unusually frank 
discussions. This time,  cardinals had no pope to mourn, and they spent little 
time worrying about how to  preserve his legacy. 
Instead the deliberations swiftly turned to the biggest challenges facing 
the  church—the rise of secular trends in Europe and the U.S., the need to 
address a  shift in Catholicism's demographics toward the Southern Hemisphere 
and the  dysfunction of a Vatican bureaucracy that had become too mired in 
scandal to do  anything about these problems.
 
 
Veteran cardinals who had cast ballots for Cardinal Bergoglio in 2005 saw a 
 chance to float his candidacy again. His earliest supporters—a coalition 
of  cardinals from Latin America, as well as Africa and Europe—viewed him as 
a  consummate outsider. He had never worked in the Roman Curia, the 
Vatican's  governing body, and he was critical of Rome's apparent disconnect 
with 
far-flung  dioceses. The challenge was getting Cardinal Bergoglio the 77 votes 
he needed,  representing two-thirds of the conclave, to become pope. He 
would need support  from many different circles, including the so-called 
Ratzingerian bloc—men who  were already lining up behind two candidates closely 
associated with the German  pope emeritus. 
In the years leading up to Pope Benedict's resignation, the pontiff had  
positioned two princes of the church as possible successors. In June 2010, he  
transferred Canadian Cardinal Marc Ouellet from the Archdiocese of Quebec 
to the  Vatican in order to run the Congregation for Bishops, the Curia 
office that vets  and advises the pope on bishop appointments world-wide. The 
naming of bishops is  among a pope's most important administrative powers. 
Bishops are his bridge to  the rest of the world, tending to local flocks and 
implementing directives from  Rome. Cardinal Ouellet's move, therefore, 
ensured that cardinals from every  corner of the planet would be vying for his 
attention. 
A year later, Pope Benedict appointed Cardinal Angelo Scola as archbishop 
of  Milan. Not only was Milan among the biggest archdioceses in Catholicism, 
it had  a centuries-old reputation as a way station to the papacy. Cardinal 
Scola's  predecessors in Milan ranged from Cardinal Giovanni Battista 
Montini, who became  Paul VI in 1963, to Cardinal Giuliano Angelo Medici, who 
was 
elected as Pope  Pius IV in 1559.
 
Both men were adherents of Pope Benedict's school of thought. As young  
priests, each had worked on "Communio," the theological journal co-founded by  
Rev. Joseph Ratzinger, as Benedict XVI was then known, as a reaction to the  
liberalizing forces unleashed by the Second Vatican Council. As alumni of  
"Communio," they were seen as standing firmly in opposition to secular 
trends  rather than trying to adapt church teaching to modern life. 
Cardinals Scola and Ouellet were among the names frequently discussed over  
private dinners among cardinals. Such meals had become a staple for 
cardinals  seeking an intimate setting to sound out their colleagues ahead of 
the 
conclave.  All cardinals entering the General Congregation are required to 
swear an oath  never to reveal its proceedings. Even then, cardinals did not 
consider the  Congregation a place to let their guard down. The atmosphere 
inside the Synod  assembly hall was fine for broad debate over the future of 
the church. But the  forum was too formal—and porous—for the delicate matter 
of discussing actual  candidates. When cardinals vote on a potential pope, 
they are backing a man they  think is best-suited to serve as a spiritual 
pastor to 1.2 billion Catholics.  But they are also picking their next boss. 
That is partly why cardinals vote  anonymously in the Sistine Chapel, masking 
their handwriting and burning the  ballots. Cardinals do not want to be on 
record voting against a future  pope. 
The private dinners, therefore, are regarded as the conclave within the  
conclave, an ostensibly casual setting that serves in fact as a high-stakes  
testing ground for candidacies. "Every night it's something different," said  
Chicago's Cardinal Francis George. "So there are different conversations 
going  on." 
At age 76, Cardinal George walks with a pronounced limp and has shed most 
of  his hair. Yet the Chicagoan has a keen eye for the art of politics. His  
knowledge of Italy's intrigue-laden political system, from the machinations 
of  the postwar Christian Democrats to the more recent antics of Silvio 
Berlusconi,  runs deep. Going into the 2013 conclave, Cardinal George's second, 
he was widely  regarded by his colleagues as one of a handful of cardinals 
who would play the  role of kingmaker. As such, he remained tight-lipped 
about his dinnertime  whereabouts. In the case of one meal in particular, he 
claimed to have no memory  of the evening at all.
 
On March 5, after a long day of speeches at the Congregation, a group of  
cardinals arrived at the Pontifical North American College under the cover of 
 night and were directed through long quiet corridors to a pair of double 
doors,  upholstered in crimson leather. On the other side was the Red Room. 
Named after a Vatican drawing room where prelates of past centuries once  
waited for news of whether they had been named a cardinal, the Red Room of 
the  college offered a splendorous showcase of American Catholicism to the 
dinner  guests. A shimmering chandelier lighted a salon trimmed with red marble 
 pilasters and oil paintings depicting late eminences such as Richard J. 
Cushing  of Boston and John F. O'Hara of Philadelphia—cardinals who dominated 
the church  in post-World War II America. 
Before those portraits, some of the most powerful churchmen in the  
English-speaking world lounged on velvet settees. They ranged from Cardinals  
George Pell of Sydney and Thomas Collins of Toronto to Americans such as  
cardinals Daniel DiNardo of Galveston-Houston and Cardinal Dolan of New York,  
once 
the North American College's rector.
 
American cardinals are an important group in papal elections. They run  
archdioceses that are among the biggest donors to the Catholic Church and to 
the  papacy. And as a potential bloc of votes inside the conclave, the 
Americans are  very powerful because they're outnumbered only by cardinals from 
Italy, said  British Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, who attended the dinner. 
Often they're  even more influential because the Italians are 
characteristically divided over  whom to support. 
Sitting down at a long banquet table, the cardinals began to discuss a  
half-dozen papal candidates. Saucers of soup were served. The candidacies of  
Cardinals Ouellet and Scola were weighed. Then someone dropped Cardinal  
Bergoglio's name into the conversation. "His name began to be thrown into the  
ring: Maybe this is the man?" recalls Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor.
 
The name didn't generate much buzz among the Americans and their guests. As 
 the evening wore on, and glasses of red and white wine began to flow, it 
became  clear that, this time around, the Americans were not united in their 
thinking  about papal contenders. "I thought the American cardinals were 
quite divided  about where to go," said Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor, who didn't 
enter the conclave  because he is above the voting-age limit of 80 years. 
Some princes of the church believed Cardinal Bergoglio, at 76, was probably 
 too old to become pope, especially after Benedict XVI had specifically 
cited his  age and frailty as reasons for his resignation. "We came into this 
whole process  thinking: The next pope has to be vigorous and therefore 
probably younger," said  Cardinal George. "So there you have a man who isn't 
young. He's 76 years old.  The question is: Does he still have vigor?" 
Two days after the dinner, however, something clicked. And it happened in 
the  span of four minutes—the length of Cardinal Bergoglio's speech when it 
was his  turn to address the General Congregation. On March 7, the Argentine 
took out a  sheet of white paper bearing notes written in tiny tight script. 
They were  bullet-pointed.
 
Many cardinals had focused their speeches on specific issues, whether it 
was  strategies for evangelization or progress reports on Vatican finances. 
Cardinal  Bergoglio, however, wanted to talk about the elephant in the room: 
the long-term  future of the church and its recent history of failure. From 
its start, Pope  Benedict's papacy had been focused on reinforcing 
Catholicism's identity,  particularly in Europe, its historic home. Amid a 
collapse of 
the church's  influence and following in Europe, the German pontiff had 
called on Catholics to  hunker down and cultivate a "creative minority" whose 
embrace of doctrine was  sound enough to resist the pull of secular trends 
across the continent. That  message, however, had been overshadowed by the 
explosion of sexual-abuse  allegations across Europe and rampant infighting in 
the Vatican ranks. 
The notes on Cardinal Bergoglio's sheet were written in his native Spanish. 
 And he could easily have delivered the remarks in Spanish—19 of the 
cardinals  voting in the conclave came from Spanish-speaking countries and a 
team 
of  Vatican translators was on hand to provide simultaneous translations in 
at least  four other languages.
 
But he spoke in Italian, the language cardinals most commonly use inside  
Vatican City and the native tongue of Italy's 28 voting-age cardinals, the 
most  of any single nation. He wanted to be understood, loud and clear. The 
leaders of  the Catholic Church, our very selves, Cardinal Bergoglio warned, 
had become too  focused on its inner life. The church was navel-gazing. The 
church was too  self-referential. 
"When the church is self-referential," he said, "inadvertently, she 
believes  she has her own light; she ceases to be the mysterium lunae and gives 
 
way to that very serious evil, spiritual worldliness."  
Roman Catholicism, he said, needed to shift its focus outward, to the world 
 beyond Vatican City walls, to the outside. The new pope "must be a man 
who, from  the contemplation and adoration of Jesus Christ, helps the church to 
go out to  the existential peripheries, that helps her to be the fruitful 
mother, who gains  life from the sweet and comforting joy of evangelizing." 
The word he used, periferia in Italian, literally translates into  "the 
periphery" or "the edge." But to Italian ears, periferia is also a  term loaded 
with heavy socioeconomic connotations. It is on the periphery of  Italian 
cities, and most European ones, that the working-class poor live, many  of 
them immigrants. The core mission of the church wasn't self-examination, the  
cardinal said. It was getting in touch with the everyday problems of a 
global  flock, most of whom were battling poverty and the indignities of 
socioeconomic  injustice.
German Cardinals Reinhard Marx of Munich and Walter Kasper, an old Vatican  
hand, perked up. So did Cardinals Juan Luis Cipriani Thorne of Lima and 
Jaime  Lucas Ortega y Alamino of Havana, who promptly asked the pope for the 
notes of  his address. For days they had heard speeches about "new 
evangelization," a term  from past popes that many cardinals used to honor 
their memory 
while disagreeing  over what it meant. Suddenly, they were hearing someone 
speak about justice,  human dignity. And it was simple, clear, refreshing. 
"He speaks in a very straightforward way," said Cardinal George. "And so  
perhaps—more than the content—it was simply a reminder that here is someone 
who  has authenticity in such a way that he's a wonderful witness to the  
discipleship."  
To Cardinal Cipriani Thorne of Lima, Peru, the address was vintage B
ergoglio.  For years, the Peruvian had heard his fellow Latin American cardinal 
deliver  similar remarks. And like those earlier speeches, his message to the 
General  Congregation walked a very fine line. Many cardinals, including 
Cipriani Thorne,  were stern opponents of any rhetoric that appeared to invite 
class warfare.  Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI had reined in liberation 
theology, the  teachings of Latin American priests who embraced Marxism, and 
churchmen like  Cipriani Thorne had supported the crackdown. But Cardinal 
Bergoglio's message to  cardinals deftly sidestepped those ideological 
pitfalls by grounding his message  in a call to model the modern church on the 
humility of its origins. 
"He's not relating this to ideology, to let's say, rich against poor,"  
Cardinal Cipriani Thorne said. "No, no, nothing like that. He's saying that  
Jesus himself brought us to this world to be poor—to not have this excessive  
consumerism, this great difference between rich and poor."  
What many thought Cardinal Bergoglio was offering the church—after a decade 
 of struggling to overcome the sexual-abuse crisis and years of internal  
bickering over issues like the liturgy—was a new narrative. He was telling a  
story of modern Catholicism that focused less on its complex inner workings 
and  more on its outreach to those most in need. 
"We've been arguing intra-ecclesia," Cardinal Cipriani Thorne said. 
Cardinal  Bergoglio's speech was a call to stop "messing around" and "get to 
the 
point:  It's Jesus."  
By Sunday, March 10, two days before the start of the conclave, a new  
narrative was taking hold among the cardinals. Cardinal Bergoglio was now a  
contender, and even the Argentine was starting to feel the pressure of being  
papabile. 
Late that night, the Rev. Thomas Rosica, a Canadian priest, was walking 
along  the edge of Rome's Piazza Navona when he ran into Cardinal Bergoglio 
making his  way back to the Domus hotel. Streetlamps illuminated the contorted 
stone figures  of Gian Lorenzo Bernini's 17th-century Fountain of Four 
Rivers. The sound of  trickling water accompanied the clerics. 
"Pray for me," Cardinal Bergoglio said, grasping the priest's hands.  
"Are you nervous?" Father Rosica asked.  
"A little bit," the cardinal said. 
—Excerpted from The Wall Street Journal's new e-book  "Pope Francis: From 
the End of the Earth to Rome," available at _PopeFrancisTheBook.com_ 
(http://harper.hc.com/popefrancis) .
 
 
A version of this article appeared April 13, 2013, on  page C1 in the U.S. 
edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline:  Fifteen Days in Rome 
How the Pope as Picked.

-- 
-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to