John Allen, Vatican correspondent for the National Catholic Reporter, lays out some of the reasons why an American pope would be unlikely:
"The fundamental impediment to an American papacy, however, is that the Vatican prizes its diplomatic independence far too seriously to elevate a superpower pope. The ‘Holy See’ is a sovereign entity that exchanges ambassadors with 174 nations and international organizations. Regardless of what that pope himself thought or felt, many people around the world would be tempted to see his decisions as somehow skewed by virtue of his citizenship. That would be especially ominous in the Middle East; it would be difficult for many people not to conclude that the pope’s policies are influenced by virtue of his nationality, no matter what he did. It would probably also be the end of Vatican attempts to improve things for Christian communities in Cuba, Vietnam, China, and across the Islamic world."
Interestingly enough, though, Allen does think that there might be an American who would be a good bet for the papabile list, if only he weren’t American:
"Having said that, is there an American cardinal who might be a formidable candidate if not for his nationality?
"The quick answer is ‘yes’: Cardinal Francis George of Chicago. George, who spent years in Rome as the superior of the Oblates of Mary Immaculate, knows the inner world of the Vatican, and yet he is not a creature of it. He also speaks Italian with ease. He’s led a complex archdiocese for years, and by most accounts handled it rather well. One indication of the esteem in which he’s held is that he is widely sought after as a guest speaker at Vatican events, a distinction that few cardinals enjoy. George is by universal consensus the intellectual leader among the Americans, someone who devours two newspapers and a theological work before breakfast."
Well, even if Cardinal George is not tapped for Rome, it is good to know that Chicago is in good hands. By the way, Allen’s book Conclave is a helpful guide to papal elections.
Ewwwwwwwww. I just clicked a link to the National Catholic Reporter. I feel even dirtier than when I clicked your last link to Beliefnet.com.
Ugh. Surely there must have been another website to link to. I can’t bring myself to click on it.
Lol at the first two comments. I wish I could devour two newspapers and a theological work before breakfast. I suppose it would help if I had a subscription to more than one newspaper, and a steady supply of theological works (whatever those are), and if I ate breakfast.
I’ll never be a cardinal at this rate. 🙁
I can’t help thinking that Cdl. Ratzinger is still in with a strong chance – especially if the Church wishes to see a continuation of the “culture” of John Paul the Great.
John Paul the Great was a holy man, and an admirable teacher of Truth.
He was a poor administrator and governor, though.
He was good for his time, but quite frankly the last thing the Church needs right now is another “toothless lion,” if I may use this phraseology respectfully.
Eric.
In view of what John paul II achieved, I would hardly cal him a ‘toothless lion’.
The world is full of administrators(Beurocrats) and govenors (politicians).
But who are the ACTION people?
People like John Paul II.
Read Fr. Neuhaus’ blog at http://www.firstthings.com/romediary/romediary.htm
for the best take on what is going on in Rome and what the Cardinals are thinking.
I’ve been trying to image a scenario where the largest, most influential NGO would take a son of the largest, most influential GO as its leader. I can’t, even though I called Card. George a long shot hampered by his nationality in the “papabili” section of the blog earlier this week.
Chao.
On the news on EWTN yesterday, there was a discussion about a great number of cardinals telling the Italian press they were going to vote for Cardinal Ratzinger. I was a little scandalized that they would make public comments about who would vote for whom because, as gleaned in an earlier post, this is not a democracy and giving people a glimpse of the politics within the conclave only empowers the stupid, the half-hearted, and the anti-Catholic to question the new pope’s “mandate”.
I think there should be a rule against such talk among the cardinals — especially so close to the conclave.
An American pope might indeed be just what this country needs. Then maybe they will start kneeling in the churches again! It may do a lot to kindle more passion and courage among orthodox Catholics and, as many have pointed out, when Americans do something, the rest of the world tends to take note.
On the other hand, I have heard Cardinal Arinze speak. He is an excellent catechizer and has been influential among Muslims.
We should be happy there are so many “perfect” choices. It has not always been this way…