Papal Conclave Cardinals: Voting begins to decide 267th Pope
Listen to article
The Catholic Church stands at a pivotal moment today as 133 cardinals—its largest conclave ever—convene in Vatican City to elect the 267th pope.
The highly anticipated conclave will take place inside the iconic Sistine Chapel, with the formal voting process set to begin this afternoon.
Before heading into seclusion, the cardinals will attend a televised Mass at St Peter's Basilica, led by Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, who also presided over the funeral of Pope Francis.
Security and secrecy are paramount. By early afternoon, Vatican authorities will shut down mobile signals within the territory to prevent any external communication.
At 16:15 (7:15 p.m. PST), the cardinals will process solemnly from the Pauline Chapel into the Sistine Chapel. Once inside, each will take a sacred oath of secrecy.
At the command of 'extra omnes'—Latin for 'everyone out'—from Master of Pontifical Liturgical Celebrations Diego Ravelli, all non-electors will exit, officially beginning the conclave.
Should a candidate secure the required majority in the very first vote, white smoke will rise from the chimney of St Peter's Basilica, signaling to the world that a new pope has been chosen.
If no consensus is reached, black smoke will billow instead, indicating further rounds of voting.
'This first ballot will set the tone,' Catholic writer Austen Ivereigh said. 'It helps identify the frontrunners—those with over 20 votes will emerge as serious contenders.'
As the world watches for the telltale plume of white smoke, the faithful wait with hope and anticipation for the next leader of the global Catholic community.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
30-05-2025
- Express Tribune
Stupidistan
Listen to article This piece seeks to expose a key contradiction between form and substance — between aspiration, machinations, desperation, incompetence, and incoherence — evident among our eastern neighbours, and is not polemical. Recent events have thrown these elements and contradictions into sharp relief, necessitating a deep dive into their mindset and increasingly radicalised diaspora. We also see how a sense of entitlement has created cognitive dissonance, where the causal link between actions and consequences is denied or ignored, feeding into a sense of ambush and victimhood. First, let me spell out a few caveats. I do not relish any nation's humiliation or misery, even if self-inflicted. My choice of title reflects my frustration with the pack of contradictions today's India has become, rather than being motivated by calumny. Two, you do not need to remind me of my nationality. Today, we talk about India, yet I can be just as critical of my own homeland. Third, the proof of the pudding is in my theoretical framework. As an ardent follower of Karl Popper, I can say that what dismays me in India is elemental, not prejudicial. Every culture can have utopian visions and theories about historical destiny. Those specific patterns worry me universally because they justify present suffering for supposed future benefits — often resulting in cruelty. Let's begin. India today calls itself a civilisational state. This is pure gibberish outside Toynbee or Huntington's political spin on such terms. Look at the term's etymological journey: Civitas (Latin): city-state, citizenship; Civilitas (Latin): civility, refinement, courtesy; Civiliser (French): to civilise, to refine; Civilisation (French, 18th century): the process of becoming civilised. Huntington's assertion that religion may have something to do with it is just an opportunistic projection. This Indian assertion was defined more succinctly by MS Golwalkar as "race pride". But here is the catch: race as a common denominator cannot exclude Pakistanis, Bangladeshis, local Muslims, or Christians. Here, Huntington provides a useful device by othering them culturally. I have written a lot about Huntington. It is tragic to see the devastating power of suggestion — where, by picking the right moment and concealing prejudice in academic garb, a clever opportunist can cause far-reaching damage. One is surprised to see how many depressed identities accepted Huntington's caricature of them at face value, took it as a licence to misbehave, and ran with it. On January 1, 2020, Netflix launched a series called Messiah. Much of the series is filmed in Israel, showing the Jewish state's affinity for the project. In one scene, the protagonist, a CIA official, finds a young barista reading Huntington's book and tells him, "The only thing you need to remember is that he was right." No beating about the bush. In India's case, you must appreciate the sociology of this mindset: over a millennium of being ruled by foreigners in your own land. Then, today's lot learned to live in a world where hate and prejudice were the unquestioned operating system for two decades following 9/11. So, Francis Fukuyama's isothymia (the desire to be recognised as equal to others) became megalothymia (a strong, often excessive, desire to be recognised as superior or better than others). But even before 9/11, significant changes had begun. In 1989, Kashmir erupted, formalising the image of the enemy: Muslims supported by Pakistan, in turn supported by China. Then came the demolition of the Babri Mosque. A recent American Hindu convert was getting primed for an interesting twist at that time. When Huntington gave his lecture and published his essay, David Frawley ran with it. He had converted to Hinduism in 1991 and called himself Pandit Vamadeva Shastri. Within a few short years, he was churning out books priming Indian and Hindu minds for the post-9/11 cruelty. Consider the titles: Arise Arjuna: Hinduism and the Modern World (1995), Awaken Bharata: A Call for India's Rebirth (1998), and my favourite, Hinduism and the Clash of Civilizations (2001, erm). He was awarded the Padma Bhushan in 2015 by the Modi government. So when 9/11 happened, India was ready to be part of the Islamophobic grand architecture. While Pakistan and many others went through hell to prove they were not the West's enemy, India gained privileges — through blackmail on matters like the 2002 parliament attack, the Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline, and the Mumbai attack — while Pakistan was framed as the evil one himself. India grew rapidly. The Indian diaspora, already known for its competence, benefited from tailwinds. While the earlier waves of Indian immigrants had to integrate fully, the new wave had no such compulsion. They brought their third-world view with them, became Modi bhakts after the 2002 Gujarat pogrom, and worked very hard to help him become PM. He could not have ruled a country as diverse as India without being a rockstar in their eyes. They wanted blood sports. He gave them that. Until now, of course — when that bubble has collapsed. Now, even if he resumes the war, he has no redemption. They will move on to the next strongman — or a brief secular interregnum. The recent war is quite similar to Kargil. When a Pakistani premier, whose approval had skyrocketed due to nuclear tests, announced that the country was withdrawing from Kargil, his popularity fell immediately, and his government within three months. India's toxic mix is far more potent. If Modi survives this, he will truly be a miracle worker. Even so, India's friends-and-family network remains strong. Justin Trudeau, who offended India, is gone. So is Joe Biden and his running mate. From the shadows, this lot manufactures crises and consent. At the peak of the Trump tariff wars, the US president had to step back when treasuries faced turbulence. Before suspending tariffs on most countries, his first act was to hand over Tahawwur Rana to India and increase tariffs on China — which pleased New Delhi. After the recent South Asian war, his announcement of a ceasefire did not go down well with the lot. The bond market is again facing shocks, and a mini-coup has erupted within the billionaire flank of Trumpworld. Elon Musk had quit, citing disagreements regarding One Big Beautiful Bill. His earlier defence of H1B visa beneficiaries — particularly Indians — was already a dead giveaway. This speaks to the power this lot has. When he moved to downsize the CIA, a concern was voiced that he was channelling forces with scores to settle with the Five Eyes intelligence community. If you find pieces in publications like The Atlantic arguing that Trump's proposed Golden Dome missile shield — meant solely for North America — should also cover Quad countries (a notion kept alive by Indian enthusiasm), know that this lot is at work. Mind you, this gratuitous use of power for such small wins — and this take-no-prisoners approach — does not go unnoticed. But sadly, it is the weak and vulnerable among the diaspora who pay the price of this extravagance.
Express Tribune
27-05-2025
- Express Tribune
Jordan Peterson stuns atheist debaters by refusing to identify as Christian in viral exchange
Canadian philosopher Jordan Peterson sparked controversy on Sunday after refusing to identify as a Christian during a heated debate with atheist vlogger Danny in a viral YouTube discussion about theology. Peterson, 62, appeared on Jubilee Media's "Surrounded: Jordan Peterson vs Twenty Atheists," a show that invites challengers to question him on a range of topics. As part of the format, Peterson sat at a desk surrounded by participants, each of whom took turns challenging his views. The exchange grew tense after Danny, a philosophy graduate and host of the PhilTalk channel, questioned Peterson about his connection to Catholicism and his stance on the Virgin Mary. "Why is that relevant?" Peterson responded when Danny pressed him on his religious affiliation. "Because you go to a Catholic church. You're interested in Catholicism, aren't you?" Danny replied. "How do they regard Mary?" The debate quickly escalated when Peterson denied the label of "Christian." 'You say that. I haven't claimed that,' Peterson snapped, as Danny insisted that his attendance at Catholic services indicated his faith. When Danny challenged Peterson with an ultimatum—'Either you're a Christian or you're not'—Peterson retorted, 'I could be either of them, but I don't have to tell you… it's private.' The confrontation reached its peak when Peterson, visibly frustrated, told Danny, 'You're really quite something, you are.' Danny shot back, 'Aren't I? But you're really quite nothing.' The insult drew audible gasps from other participants, and Peterson, clearly agitated, concluded the segment, declaring, "I'm done with him." Peterson, a former psychology professor at the University of Toronto, has long been a controversial figure. He rose to prominence a decade ago for his outspoken critiques of identity politics and political correctness, later becoming known for his impassioned media appearances. In a January 2025 interview with The Spectator, Peterson had hinted at his complex relationship with Christianity. "In the deepest sense, yes, I would say I am a Christian," he said. "But I'm striving for understanding above all. I suppose people might call me agnostic, but that's not true… I'm a new kind of Christian." The debate continues to divide opinions online, with some defending Peterson's right to explore his beliefs on his own terms, while others criticise his reluctance to openly identify with a faith tradition.
Business Recorder
21-05-2025
- Business Recorder
Pope calls for ‘sufficient humanitarian aid' into Gaza
VATICAN CITY: Pope Leo XIV called Wednesday for sufficient humanitarian aid to be allowed into war-ravaged Gaza, where humanitarian agencies say a total blockade has sparked critical food and medicine shortages. 'The situation in the Gaza Strip is worrying and painful,' the pope said during his first weekly general audience in St. Peter's Square. 'I renew my heartfelt appeal to allow the entry of sufficient humanitarian aid and to put an end to the hostilities, the heartbreaking price of which is paid by children, the elderly, the sick,' he said. Leo, who was elected on May 8 to be the Catholic Church's first US pope, has made peace a theme of his papacy so far, calling for a ceasefire in the Israel-Hamas war. Israel has come under massive international pressure to abandon its intensified military campaign in Gaza and allow urgent humanitarian aid into the besieged strip. The UN announced Monday that it had been cleared to send in aid for the first time since Israel imposed a total blockade on March 2, sparking severe shortages of food and medicine. But aid groups say the amount allowed in is not enough to meet needs.
