Learn more here. Join now. Column Distinctly Catholic. By Gerard O'Connell. Get Michael Sean Winters' email in your inbox. Email address. Join the Conversation Send your thoughts and reactions to Letters to the Editor. Column 'The Election of Pope Francis' is a day-by-day, ballot-by-ballot tale. Most Recent Thousands call for Gomez to apologize after calling protests 'pseudo-religions' Nov 12, Vatican financial reform efforts continue amid scandals and deficit Nov 12, Assisi pilgrimage with the poor: Pope calls for open hands, open hearts Nov 12, New survey raises concerns about increasingly conservative clergy Nov 12, Classroom questions and answers on God and life's fairness Nov 12, Berlin archbishop to name minister for gays, calls sidelining 'painful' Aug 10, Las Cruces lawmaker says politics led to denial of Communion Jul 20, Abuse allegation against retired Buffalo auxiliary under investigation Jul 14, Pope Francis goes to Rome hospital for intestinal surgery Jul 4, More Like This A government shutdown and a papal letdown Jan 22, Cardinal DiNardo, the new kingmaker?
Nov 12, What's it like to have Pope Francis as your boss? Eyebrows were raised right from the very first vote in the Sistine Chapel when the archbishop of Milan, Angelo Scola, who had been favorite to become pope only gained 30 votes, much less than anticipated. The second most-voted candidate, with 26 votes, was Jorge Bergoglio, Archbishop of Buenos Aires, on that afternoon in March 12, How this, a surprising result for many, came about amid dinners, meetings and Vatican intrigues, is recounted with journalistic rigor and relying on impeccable sources from within the secret of the conclave by Irish columnist Gerard O'Connell in his book: "The Election of Pope Francis: An Inside Account of the Conclave That Changed History.
O'Connell reveals that until Mar. However, the veteran Vatican specialist explained that during the general congregations, the meetings of the entire College of Cardinals before the conclave, "an anti-Italian sentiment seemed to have begun to arise among some foreign cardinals who realized that almost all the actors involved in the Vatileaks scandal were Italian. Do we need another theologian pope? The reason for this, it seems, goes back to the conclave, when the Swiss Guard standing on duty outside the doors of the chapel could sometimes hear what was being said inside, especially when the vote counts were announced over the P.
As the third scrutineer read out a name on a ballot sheet, Cardinal Sandoval repeated it so that all could hear. There was an air of high suspense inside the Sistine Chapel as the results were being announced. For the first time the electors were revealing their choices; they were putting their cards on the table. When the names on all the ballots had been read out, a knot was fastened at each end of the thread and the joined ballots were set aside.
This was followed by the third and last phase of the voting process, which began with adding up the votes each individual had received. The results held several big surprises. Before the conclave, several cardinals had predicted that there would be a wide spread on the first ballot, but few had imagined how wide: 23 prelates received at least one vote.
Before the conclave, several cardinals had predicted that there would be a wide spread on the first ballot, but few had imagined how wide: 23 prelates received at least one vote on the first ballot; this meant that one out of every five cardinals present got at least one vote, with four cardinals getting 10 or more votes.
The top five vote-getters in the first round were as follows:. Angelo Scola came first with 30 votes, but he did not receive as many votes as had been predicted by some cardinals and the Italian media.
The big surprise was Jorge Bergoglio, who came in at second place, close behind Scola, with 26 votes. It was a most promising start for the archbishop of Buenos Aires. Marc Ouellet scored well, too, better than expected, and arrived in third place, having obtained 22 votes. He seemed a strong candidate. On the other hand, Odilo Pedro Scherer, the much-touted Brazilian, had a surprisingly low score; he got a mere four votes.
The voting process ended with the burning of the ballots. After a final check of the report sheets on which the scrutineers had recorded the votes, the ballot sheets and the reports were taken to one of the two specially installed stoves at the back left-hand side of the Sistine Chapel as one faces the altar. The origin of the stove goes back to the 18th century, when the master of ceremonies came up with the brilliant idea of communicating to the world whether or not a new pope has been elected by discharging white or black smoke from the chapel chimney as the ballot sheets and records are burned.
Following the norms for the election process, the ballots from the first vote at this conclave were burned in the older stove, which has been used at every conclave since This was done by one of the scrutineers, with the assistance of the secretary of the conclave, Archbishop Lorenzo Baldisseri, who had been re-admitted after the votes had been counted.
As they began the burning, they activated an electronic smoke-producing device in the newer stove, first used at the conclave, which contained a cartridge containing five types of chemical mixtures that can produce black or white smoke as required. As per the rulebook, the burning and smoke-signal operation had to be completed before the cardinals left the Sistine Chapel.
The ballot sheets were burned, the electronic smoke producing device was activated, and at p. Rome time , black smoke streamed forth from the slender rust-colored chimney of the Sistine Chapel. Given that no candidate had gained the two-thirds majority on the first vote, the ballot sheets were burned, the electronic smoke producing device was activated, and at p. Rome time , black smoke streamed forth from the slender rust-colored chimney of the Sistine Chapel, announcing to the world that no pope had been elected.
The sight of the black smoke provoked an audible Nooooo from the thousands of faithful and tourists huddled in the cold under multi-colored umbrellas in St. They stood there, constantly shifting their gaze from the small chimney to the maxi-screens in St. To an outsider, that scattered first vote might have given the impression of great uncertainty, but the electors saw it in a very different light.
God was there right through. The vote revealed several things. It showed that Scola was the only strong European candidate in line to succeed Benedict, and while this pastor and eminent theologian had support, it was at the lower end of what had been expected on the eve of the conclave, when cardinals and much of the Italian press had anticipated that he would be out in front with around 40 votes. Naturally, this came as a disappointment to his supporters.
More important, the vote confirmed what many already knew or suspected: the 28 Italian electors were deeply divided about Scola. Indeed, as the history of the last two conclaves October and April showed, when the Italians are divided, an Italian will not be elected. Was history about to repeat itself? That first ballot seemed to indicate to many electors that the next pope would not be European; he would come from the Americas.
It also left little doubt that Scherer was out of the race; he was seen as the candidate of the status quo in a conclave that was looking for radical change. As the history of the last two conclaves showed, when the Italians are divided, an Italian will not be elected.
The archbishop of Boston had much in his favor: He is a pastor, well liked, with a simple lifestyle; he speaks Spanish fluently and has a sterling track record on handling cases of sexual abuse of minors by clergy. To elect an American, even if he happened to be a Franciscan friar, would not have gone down well in the Southern Hemisphere or in the churches of the developing world.
Cardinal Ouellet had scored much better than expected in the first vote, and he was in a strong position. As the cardinals discussed his candidacy in small groups and one-to-one conversations that Tuesday night, March 12, they recognized several positive factors in favor of this polyglot Canadian.
He had pastoral experience as a priest in Colombia and as archbishop in Quebec. Important, too, was the fact that he knew the Vatican from the inside, having worked first in the Pontifical Council for the Promotion of Christian Unity and since in the powerful Congregation for Bishops.
0コメント