Who will be the next pope? Here are some possible contenders
Pope Francis' death on Monday, the day after Easter Sunday, started off a series of traditions that in a few weeks will culminate in a vote for the next pope.
Francis' successor will be decided by the Catholic Church's Cardinal Electors, a group of about 135 cardinals under the age of 80, who are expected to begin their conclave in early to mid-May to hold a secretive election for the next pontiff.
Over the last 600 years — since 1378 — cardinals have been chosen for the position, although eligibility technically extends to any male Roman Catholic who has been baptized.
Here is look at some of the cardinals considered possible contenders to become pope:
Cardinal Peter Erdo, archbishop of Budapest, Hungary
Cardinal Peter Erdo, a 72-year-old canon lawyer, is the highest ranking Catholic leader in a country that is 80% Christian. He is known for his support of the pope's outreach to Orthodox Christians.
Erdo is also on the conservative side of the European cultural divide. On migration, a key issue for Hungary, he has conveyed a balanced approach, recognizing the right to migrate but also the importance of ensuring political stability.
Erdo is considered a traditionalist but is also respected by liberals, which could make him a unifying force within the church.
Cardinal Fridolin Ambongo, archbishop of Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo
Cardinal Fridolin Ambongo, president of the Symposium of Episcopal Conferences of Africa and Madagascar, grew global attention for leading African bishops in unanimous rejection of "Fiducia Supplicans," a declaration the Vatican issued in 2023 that included guidelines on the blessings of people in same-sex relationships.
At 65 years old, he is known as a supporter of orthodoxy and defends priestly celibacy and the Church's moral teachings. He is also known as a promoter of social justice and a champion of the poor and voiceless, and is outspoken in his criticism of the Congolese government.
Cardinal Mario Grech, secretary general for the Synod of Bishops
Cardinal Mario Grech, 68, is a canon lawyer who has major influence on how synods in the church are run. Supporters have praised him for leading the charge in implementing a more consultative and inclusive approach to church governance.
Grech comes from Malta, which is one of the smallest countries in the world.
Cardinal Pietro Parolin, the Vatican's secretary of state
Cardinal Pietro Parolin, 70, is second-in-command at the Vatican and a career diplomat who has consistently risen above any turbulence marking the pontificate.
He is regarded as a moderate who, if elected, could repair rifts inside the church. He is also considered a progressive with a global vision.
Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa, Latin patriarch of Jerusalem
Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa, 60, is a pastoral candidate who has spoken out amid the Israel-Hamas war and visited Gaza during the conflict.
He is a proponent of social justice and sees himself as a servant of the people. He is similar to Francis in his concern for migrants, interfaith dialogue and his disdain for clericalism.
Cardinal Luis Tagle of the Philippines
Cardinal Luis Tagle, 67, and pro-prefect for the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples, is known as the "Asian Francis" for his missionary spirit as well as his emphasis on caring for the poor and welcoming of LGBTQ and divorced and remarried Catholics.
He is the former archbishop of Manila, in the Philippines, which is one of the most Catholic countries on the continent of Asia, and studied in the U.S. for seven years. His election would signal a continuation of Francis' pontificate.
Cardinal Matteo Zuppi, archbishop of Bologna, Italy
Cardinal Matteo Zuppi, 69, is the president of the Italian bishops conference. He is known as a "street priest" and missionary and wants a church that listens to the faithful and is willing to modernize. Zuppi is inclusive of same-sex couples, as well as people of different religions.
Francis chose Zuppi as his envoy to Russia and Ukraine, as well as to the West Bank and Beijing, to promote peace.
Cardinal Anders Arborelius, archbishop of Stockholm
Cardinal Anders Arborelius, 75, was raised Lutheran and converted to Catholicism at the age of 20. He is the first ever cardinal from Scandinavia.
He is also a traditionalist on the church's teaching on sexual ethics and gender, and has a strong concern for the environment.
Arborelius has been a proponent of immigration into Sweden, calling for dialogue and integration instead of restrictions.
Cardinal Gerald Cyprien Lacroix of Quebec
Cardinal Gérald Cyprien Lacroix, Metropolitan Archbishop of Quebec, Canada, is 67 years old. Earlier in his career he spent years as a missionary and seminary professor in Colombia.
He temporarily stepped back from his duties amid sexual abuse allegations, which he denied, and returned to his duties last year after a church-led investigation found no evidence of misconduct.
Inside the monarch butterfly migration mystery: flying to Mexico from Canada, the U.S.
Scientists warn what future bird flu mutations could mean for people | 60 Minutes
What's next for AI at DeepMind, Google's artificial intelligence lab | 60 Minutes
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Chicago Tribune
4 hours ago
- Chicago Tribune
How the Vatican manages money and where Pope Leo XIV might find more
VATICAN CITY — The world's smallest country has a big budget problem. The Vatican doesn't tax its residents or issue bonds. It primarily finances the Catholic Church's central government through donations that have been plunging, ticket sales for the Vatican Museums, as well as income from investments and an underperforming real estate portfolio. The last year the Holy See published a consolidated budget, in 2022, it projected $878 million, with the bulk paying for embassies around the world and Vatican media operations. In recent years, it hasn't been able to cover costs. That leaves Pope Leo XIV facing challenges to drum up the funds needed to pull his city-state out of the red. Anyone can donate money to the Vatican, but the regular sources come in two main forms. Canon law requires bishops around the world to pay an annual fee, with amounts varying and at bishops' discretion 'according to the resources of their dioceses.' U.S. bishops contributed over one-third of the $22 million collected annually under the provision from 2021-2023, according to Vatican data. The other main source of annual donations is more well-known to ordinary Catholics: Peter's Pence, a special collection usually taken on the last Sunday of June. From 2021-2023, individual Catholics in the U.S. gave an average $27 million (23.7 million euros) to Peter's Pence, more than half the global total. American generosity hasn't prevented overall Peter's Pence contributions from cratering. After hitting a high of $101 million in 2006, contributions hovered around $75 million during the 2010's then tanked to $47 million during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, when many churches were closed. Donations remained low in the following years, amid revelations of the Vatican's bungled investment in a London property, a former Harrod's warehouse that it hoped to develop into luxury apartments. The scandal and ensuing trial confirmed that the vast majority of Peter's Pence contributions had funded the Holy See's budgetary shortfalls, not papal charity initiatives as many parishioners had been led to believe. Peter's Pence donations rose slightly in 2023 and Vatican officials expect more growth going forward, in part because there has traditionally been a bump immediately after papal elections. The Vatican bank and the city state's governorate, which controls the museums, also make annual contributions to the pope. As recently as a decade ago, the bank gave the pope around $62.7 million a year to help with the budget. But the amounts have dwindled; the bank gave nothing specifically to the pope in 2023, despite registering a net profit of $34.2 million, according to its financial statements. The governorate's giving has likewise dropped off. Some Vatican officials ask how the Holy See can credibly ask donors to be more generous when its own institutions are holding back. Leo will need to attract donations from outside the U.S., no small task given the different culture of philanthropy, said the Rev. Robert Gahl, director of the Church Management Program at Catholic University of America's business school. He noted that in Europe there is much less of a tradition (and tax advantage) of individual philanthropy, with corporations and government entities doing most of the donating or allocating designated tax dollars. Even more important is leaving behind the 'mendicant mentality' of fundraising to address a particular problem, and instead encouraging Catholics to invest in the church as a project, he said. Speaking right after Leo's installation ceremony in St. Peter's Square, which drew around 200,000 people, Gahl asked: 'Don't you think there were a lot of people there that would have loved to contribute to that and to the pontificate?' In the U.S., donation baskets are passed around at every Sunday Mass. Not so at the Vatican. The Vatican has 4,249 properties in Italy and 1,200 more in London, Paris, Geneva and Lausanne, Switzerland. Only about one-fifth are rented at fair market value, according to the annual report from the APSA patrimony office, which manages them. Some 70% generate no income because they house Vatican or other church offices; the remaining 10% are rented at reduced rents to Vatican employees. In 2023, these properties only generated $39.9 million in profit. Financial analysts have long identified such undervalued real estate as a source of potential revenue. But Ward Fitzgerald, the president of the U.S.-based Papal Foundation, which finances papal charities, said the Vatican should also be willing to sell properties, especially those too expensive to maintain. Many bishops are wrestling with similar downsizing questions as the number of church-going Catholics in parts of the U.S. and Europe shrinks and once-full churches stand empty. Toward that end, the Vatican recently sold the property housing its embassy in Tokyo's high-end Sanbancho neighborhood, near the Imperial Palace, to a developer building a 13-story apartment complex, according to the Kensetsu News trade journal. Yet there has long been institutional reluctance to part with even money-losing properties. Witness the Vatican announcement in 2021 that the cash-strapped Fatebenefratelli Catholic hospital in Rome, run by a religious order, would not be sold. Pope Francis simultaneously created a Vatican fundraising foundation to keep it and other Catholic hospitals afloat. 'They have to come to grips with the fact that they own so much real estate that is not serving the mission of the church,' said Fitzgerald, who built a career in real estate private equity.
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
GOP's Mark Green to resign from Congress, shrinking the Republicans' small majority
Five months into the current Congress, only one member — Rep. Mike Waltz — has resigned, though he had a good excuse: The Florida Republican was offered an opportunity to serve as the White House national security adviser. (That did not turn out especially well for him.) The resignation list, however, is poised to grow from one member to two. NBC News reported: Rep. Mark Green, R-Tenn., said Monday that he will resign from Congress after it passes a massive policy bill to advance President Donald Trump's domestic agenda. 'It is with a heavy heart that I announce my retirement from Congress. Recently, I was offered an opportunity in the private sector that was too exciting to pass up,' Green said in a statement, adding that he notified Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., that he would vacate his seat after the House's next vote on the legislative package that's currently in the Senate. All things considered, 'retirement' wasn't the best choice of words. Plenty of incumbent members have announced in recent months that they don't intend to run for re-election next year, but the Tennessee Republican isn't waiting nearly that long. Indeed, while it's not yet clear exactly when the House might vote again on the GOP's domestic policy megabill — the inaptly named 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' — once that happens, Green is walking away from Capitol Hill altogether. In other words, it's probably best to measure the remainder of his tenure in weeks, not months. For those unfamiliar with the outgoing congressman, the Tennessean has a curious professional background. In 2017, for example, Donald Trump tapped Green — at the time, a GOP state senator — to serve as his secretary of the Army. As regular readers might recall, the political world soon learned about Green's many strange beliefs: He'd argued that being transgender is a 'disease,' promoted creationism, criticized public health care programs for interfering with Christian evangelism, and even raised some strange concerns about Victoria's Secret catalogs. A Slate report added that Green also 'agreed with a questioner that President Obama is not a citizen and he refused to answer whether the former president is really a Muslim.' As this information came to light, even some Senate Republicans raised concerns about his nomination, deeming the Tennessean a bit too radical to be confirmed, and on a Friday afternoon in May 2017, Green quietly withdrew from consideration. A year later, he was elected to Congress. After the 2022 midterm elections, GOP leaders thought it'd be a good idea to put him in charge of the House Homeland Security Committee, where he launched a crusade to impeach then-Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas for reasons that still don't make a lot of sense. In February 2024, Green announced his retirement, insisting that Congress was 'broken,' and it was 'time for me to return home.' Two weeks later, Green changed his mind, un-retired, and proceeded with his re-election effort, telling local voters that he wanted to represent them again in the U.S. House. The GOP lawmaker's constituents rewarded him with another term, which he's now abandoning to pursue a private sector opportunity. Some of the relevant details are not yet available — we don't know for certain, for example, when Green's last day will be, or how long it will take to hold a special election to fill the vacancy — but once his resignation takes effect, the House Republican majority, which is already tiny, will shrink once again. The House GOP conference currently has 220 members. With Green out, it will be 219 members — one more than is usually necessary to pass legislation in the chamber. This post updates our related earlier coverage. This article was originally published on
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
100 years ago, the Social Gospel movement pushed to improve workers' lives – but also to promote its vision of Christian America
President Donald Trump has praised the Gilded Age, which he believes was a time of immense national prosperity thanks to tariffs, no income tax, and few regulations on business. Similar to today, the late 19th century was a time where a small group of men enjoyed immense wealth, privilege and power to shape the nation. It was a time of immense inequality, as factory and housing conditions crushed the lives of the poor. And it was a time of white Christian nationalism. In Northern cities, reformers saw the wealth gap, the plight of workers and the squalid conditions in tenements as undermining their vision of a Christian America. Fueled by faith, the Social Gospel movement worked to expand labor rights and improve living conditions at the turn of the 20th century. At the same time, many of these white Protestant activists believed their own culture and race to be superior, and this prejudice hindered their efforts. They often spouted anti-Catholic and anti-immigrant rhetoric, and mostly ignored Black workers' plight. Ever since the Puritans landed, white Christian nationalism has informed how many Protestants try to shape their country – a history I trace with church historian Richard T. Hughes in the book 'Christian America and the Kingdom of God.' But Christian nationalism has taken dramatically different forms over time. The progressive Social Gospellers of a century ago are a particularly striking contrast to the conservative Christian right that has shaped U.S. politics for half a century, up to today. There are many differences between Christian nationalism then and now. Like many conservative Christians today, however, the Social Gospellers believed that the United States was uniquely chosen and blessed by God, and called to be a Christian nation. They saw themselves as the rightful guardians of that mission. And though the country was still overwhelmingly Protestant, they feared they were losing influence. New research explored the history of the Bible – research that many Christians feared would undermine people's trust in Scripture as the word of God, by emphasizing its human composition. New scientific ideas about the Earth's creation and human evolution challenged their visions of an all-powerful, all-knowing God. Meanwhile, rapid industrialization and urbanization had created new social challenges, such as workers' safety and living conditions, leading some to reject faith as irrelevant to their needs. Social Gospellers wanted to vindicate Christianity and show it was still relevant to modern life. But white leaders' vision of what a Christian America should look like conflated their Protestant faith with their race and culture. Josiah Strong, for example, was a Congregationalist minister known for promoting factory safety. But he stoked fear of Catholic immigrants and endorsed the expansion of the U.S. as a benevolent empire. The Anglo-Saxon race 'is destined to dispossess many weaker races, assimilate others, and mold the remainder,' Strong argued in his 1885 book, 'Our Country.' Another Social Gospel reformer, Northern Baptist theologian Walter Rauschenbusch, railed against unrestrained greed, political corruption, militarism and contempt between elites and the working class. But he shared the white supremacy of his age. God was favoring Germanic and Anglo-Saxon people, he claimed, to enact God's purposes. 'Other races are as dear to God as we and he may be holding them in reserve to carry His banner when we drop it,' he wrote in an undated article. But it was part of God's plan, he believed, for Northern Europeans to 'hold the larger part of the world's wealth and power in the hollow of their hands and the larger share of the world's intellectual and spiritual possessions in the hollow of their heads.' Though many white Protestants felt threatened by the challenges of immigration, they were still a clear majority, and they presumed that most Americans would endorse applying Christian ethics to public policy and social reform. What's more, women gaining the right to vote in 1920 meant Social Gospel leaders expanded Protestants' power at the ballot box. Many Social Gospel leaders embraced women's suffrage because women were already leading supporters for their causes: For example, Frances Willard, who promoted temperance and workers' rights; and Jane Addams, who ran a Christian 'settlement house,' or community center, for the poor. But in another sense, demographics were not on their side. The U.S. might have been a very white and Christian country, but in some Social Gospellers' minds, the era's waves of immigrants were not the 'right' kind of Christian: Northern European and Protestant. Immigration was shifting from Great Britain, Ireland and Germany to Russia, Poland, Hungary and Italy. While Protestants far outnumbered Catholics nationally, Strong wrote that they were double the Protestant population in major cities like New York, Chicago and Philadelphia. Strong argued that Catholic immigrants were lazy, prone to alcoholism and criminal activity, and willing to sell their vote to corrupt city politicians. He claimed they would corrupt the morals of Anglo-Saxon Americans, and that if the Catholic population grew, it would undermine Protestants' religious liberty. Nativist views like these led to the National Origins Act of 1924, which restricted the number of immigrants. Quotas for each country were based on the profile of the American population in 1890 – an attempt to maintain Protestant dominance against Catholic and Jewish immigration from Southern and Eastern Europe. That distrust also kept Social Gospellers from partnering with Roman Catholic leaders on shared concern for workers. Still, when it came to workers' basic needs, reformers cared deeply about improving circumstances for the 'least of these.' The movement was strongly influenced by the biblical parable of the sheep and the goats: verses in the Book of Matthew where Jesus promotes feeding the hungry, caring for the sick, clothing the naked and visiting those in prison. Social Gospellers aimed to prove that Christianity could answer the social challenges caused by industrialization, urbanization and immigration. For the most part, they sought to use their privilege in ways that promoted the flourishing of all Americans, such as expanding labor rights and providing services to the poor through settlement houses. In 1908, for example, the Federal Council of Churches adopted a 14-point statement called the 'Social Creed,' affirming that churches should support reforms 'to lift the crushing burdens of the poor, and to reduce the hardships and uphold the dignity of labor.' While some of the reforms they called for are taken for granted today — like one day off per week — other calls, like a living wage for all, are yet to be realized. Over the past half-century, the modern Christian right, too, has feared that its vision for the nation is eroding. Conservative churches have seen their influence drop as more Americans move away from organized religion and reject their rejection of LGBTQ+ people. I — along with other scholars — argue that these fears have helped fuel resurgent Christian nationalism today. Since merging with the tea party movement during the Obama administration, the Christian right has increasingly embraced an anti-immigration and anti-minority stance, fearing the loss of its own standing. Like the Social Gospellers of a century ago, the Christian nationalists of recent decades are wary of religious and racial change in their country. Yet the movement's priorities – often focused around its vision of families, sex and gender – are starkly more limited than the broader quality-of-life issues that Social Gospellers addressed. Both groups desired an America rooted in biblical values. But each interpreted Scripture through its own lens, seeking to remake America in its own, white Protestant image. This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Christina Littlefield, Pepperdine University Read more: How Christian nationalism played a role in incorporating the phrase 'so help me God' in the presidential oath of office Claims of 'anti-Christian bias' sound to some voters like a message about race, not just religion How the social gospel movement explains the roots of today's religious left Christina Littlefield does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
