As the Cardinals Gather: Sede Vacante Part II. Or "I'm Dreaming of an American Pope?"

Boston's Cardinal O'Malley: Papabile?

I must admit that I feel more than a bit inferior as Catholic bloggers go.  I don't keep in contact with any cardinals, curial or otherwise.  I have no inside track on the Papabili, those poor souls most talked about in the press as contenders to be the next to wear the red shoes.  My one claim to fame is that I was ordained a priest by Oscar Cardinal Rodriguez, SDB of Tegucigalpa, whose name emerged in pope watching circles as early as 2001 and continued to get a lot of buzz before the conclave of 2005.  While he's not on most "experts" short lists now, he's still getting some mentions this time around.  I really don't even have enough time these days to scan the press so I can give you my penetrating inexpert analysis.

But I have done some superficial reading and listening, which has lead me to the conclusion that March 2013 is shaping up to be much like August 1978, and April 2005.   In both 1978 and 2005 voices in the press and in some quarters of the Church were calling for a pope who would follow through on what they considered the logical conclusions of Vatican II: an end to mandatory priestly celibacy, the ordination of women, the relaxing of the traditional prohibitions of contraception and premarital sex.  Today we can add the call for some type of recognition of same sex unions, even if it falls short of actually considering them sacramental marriages.  Along with these very specific reforms, there was a desire to see a more decentralized Church, where local dioceses had more autonomy, much like in the Orthodox Churches or the Anglican Communion.

As I wrote the last time out, I think all this talk of doctrinal shifts is a chasing at shadows.  Every new pope since at least Pius IX in 1846, with the possible exception of Leo XIII, was thought to be the one who was going to "modernize" the Church.  In each case doctrine remained substantially unchanged, with the exception of the two Marian pronouncements.  Some did make structural changes in how the Church apparatus functioned, or made adjustments to certain practices, like the lowering of the First Communion age by Pius X, but none can be called doctrinally progressive in the contemporary sense.  Even Paul VI, seen as the progressive implementer of Vatican II, reaffirmed the Church's teaching on contraception, priestly celibacy and the all male priesthood, as well as speaking of Satan as a real force rather than as an abstraction or metaphor. 

Judging by what I am managing to catch in the press the cardinals right now are not so caught up with doctrinal questions as they are with structure issues.  La Stampa's English edition is setting things up as a fight between the Italians in the Curia against the Americans.  The U.S. contingent is looking for broad reforms including greater transparency in the Vatican, and a Church bureaucracy that serves the interests of the pope and not it's own counter agenda.  The curial Italians want to maintain the status quo.  What I'm hearing is that while Europeans and Latin Americans are leery of an American candidate, the African and Asian contingents have a great deal of respect for the U.S. cardinals, and so a Papabili from the New World is not as far fetched as it has been in the past.  

Among the Americans New York's Cardinal Dolan is the name that gets the most press, but Boston's Sean Cardinal O'Malley's name is emerging as well.  He's seen as someone who reformed the Archdiocese of Boston, epicenter of the sex abuse scandal, with both Sunday collections and enrollment at the local seminary on the rise in the last few years.  While an American being elected pope is still a long shot, it's nice to know that simply being from the United States doesn't automatically disqualify someone from ascending to the See of Peter.

I wrote that this time around was shaping up to be much like interregnums of the past.  But there is at least one big difference, I think.  Since this conclave has followed on the heals of a retirement as opposed to a death, the cardinals have had more time to think dispassionately about what they are doing. There is no mourning a beloved Holy Father, or sentimental feelings that a new pope needs to continue someone's legacy.  While Benedict is loved still, there is a recognition that a new direction, at least in terms of governance, needs to happen, and many of the cardinals are willing to spend the few extra days to make sure they do it right.  I pray they are doing the spiritual preparations as well as they appear to be doing the administrative due diligence.

Next week, as the conclave begins (I hope) I'll be in Provincial Chapter meetings.  We don't get locked in or anything, and there's no smoke, white or otherwise, but these are official deliberations in which we set out an agenda for the next three years and prepare for the General Chapter in Rome next year.   In the midst of the general sessions and small group break outs I'll keep one eye on Rome and the other on the keyboard.