logo
How Long Will the Papal Conclave Last? Here's What We Know

How Long Will the Papal Conclave Last? Here's What We Know

Yahoo08-05-2025

Cardinals and bishops gather in the Vatican's Clementine Hall on Feb. 24, 2005. Credit - Eric Vandeville—Getty Images
After the death of a Pope, a papal conclave—an incredibly secretive and important process— takes place in the Vatican as cardinals determine who will next lead the Catholic Church.
Following the passing of Pope Francis on April 21, preparations for the conclave began to take place, as cardinals from around the world made their way to Rome.
On Wednesday, May 7, the first day of the conclave, 133 cardinals gathered in the Sistine Chapel to cast their vote. They failed to reach a decision, as signalled by the black smoke which emerged from the Chapel's chimney in the evening. A candidate must receive at least two-thirds of the vote in order to become the next Pope, and a successful vote will see white smoke leaving the Sistine Chapel.
On the second day of a conclave, four rounds of voting will be held, and so on, until a new leader of the Catholic Church is elected. In theory, this process could last indefinitely.
It's of little surprise then that conclaves have previously been known to last for years. However, recent elections have been much shorter. The last conclave to last more than a week was in 1831, when Pope Gregory XVI was elected after 51 days of voting.
Read More: 10 Surprising Facts About Papal Conclaves
Here's a breakdown of how the length of conclaves has changed in recent years.
The death of Pope Clement VI in 1268 led to quite a crisis for the Catholic Church. 17 cardinals were part of the conclave put together to choose his successor, but the group was split between two factions known as the Guelphs and Ghibellenes.
This division, as well as personal and political motivations amongst the cardinals, led to a stalemate, and the conclave ultimately lasted 1,006 days. It took the closing of the Viterbo city gates, where the conclave was held, and complete isolation from the outside world before a decision could be reached.
This three-year conclave led the new Pope, Gregory X, to declare in 1274 that future conclaves must be held behind closed doors, with no contact between cardinals and the outside.
Gregory X said that cardinals should be locked in isolation 'cum clave'—latin for 'with a key.' The term has since developed into 'conclave,' giving this election process its modern name.
In the years that followed, conclaves were known to last for anything from a few days to a few months.
Read More: Meet Cardinal Luis Antonio Gokim Tagle, a Top Contender to Succeed Pope Francis
Thankfully, for Catholics and the rest of the world, recent conclaves haven't lasted a pain-staking three years. Out of the last five, the longest has only been three days.
The most recent election of Pope Francis in March 2013, lasted two days. Cardinals needed just five rounds of voting to elect the next Pontiff; one vote on the first day and four on the second.
It was the same time frame in 2005, as Pope Benedict XVI was chosen by cardinals after two days.
In 1978, there were remarkably two conclaves. In October, Pope John Paul II was elected after eight rounds of voting across three days. Just months before, in August, John Paul I was elected in two days. John Paul I died of a heart attack just 33 days after the beginning of his term as Pope. His death has been shrouded in conspiracy, given the sudden nature and timing of his passing.
Fifteen years prior, in June 1963, Pope Paul VI was chosen as the next Pontiff after three days of voting.
Of course, there is no knowing when it comes to an exact timeframe, but if recent conclaves are anything to go by, we should know who the next head of the Catholic Church will be within a week.
Contact us at letters@time.com.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

From trash to takeoff: Virginia eyes sustainable fuel future for aviation
From trash to takeoff: Virginia eyes sustainable fuel future for aviation

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

From trash to takeoff: Virginia eyes sustainable fuel future for aviation

Washington Dulles International Airport in Dulles, Virginia (Photo by Getty Images) As President Donald Trump's administration scales back national climate initiatives, local leaders in the Washington Metropolitan region are stepping up to push for cleaner skies — with jet fuel made from trash, crops and forest waste. At the heart of the push is Sustainable Aviation Fuel, or SAF, a biofuel derived from sources like corn grain, municipal solid waste, wet waste, and agricultural residues. Though not yet widely used, SAF is gaining traction thanks to its lower emissions and growing interest from regional policymakers. The aviation industry has yet to fully embrace the alternative fuel, largely due to the high cost of production and limited infrastructure for storage costs. But with international interest rising and U.S. climate policies shifting, local leaders remain hopeful that a wider transition is on the horizon. In the first three quarters of 2024, U.S. production of SAF reached 30 million gallons — a sharp increase of just five million in 2021, according to recent data collected by the U.S. Department of Energy. 'I'm very optimistic about its ability to survive because it goes straight to the farmers, and it is really about American-made products,' said Ed Hubbard, general counsel and vice president of governmental affairs for the Renewable Fuels Association. 'If you can fall within the framework of 'American energy, greatness and dominance,' I think that those are the aspects that survive throughout the process.' Hubbard warned that if the Trump administration withdraws incentives for SAF, it would contradict its own America First Investment Policy — a doctrine designed to pressure companies into manufacturing domestically instead of overseas. On Tuesday, Hubbard joined a panel discussion in Washington, D.C., focused on raising awareness about SAF. The event highlighted the formation of a working group, a directory of aviation-related associations, and plans for a traveling presentation aimed at engaging government and aviation leaders. The panel was hosted by the Greater Washington Region Clean Cities Coalition (GWRCCC), which works to promote affordable, local transportation fuels, energy-efficient mobility systems, and other fuel-saving practices. The federal government developed a strategy to encourage the commercial-scale production of SAF through a plan called the Sustainable Aviation Fuel Grand Challenge. Under President Joe Biden's administration, the initiative set primary goals to reduce costs, bolster energy security, and significantly increase the production and use of SAF. Key targets include achieving a 50% reduction in life cycle emissions compared to traditional fuels and meeting production milestones of three billion gallons annually by 2030 and 35 billion gallons by 2050 — enough to meet all domestic demand. Given the significant impact of jet travel on the environment, advocates hope SAF can help mitigate the pollution it causes. In 2022, aviation accounted for 2% of global carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA), and that share is expected to grow. The agency noted that aviation has experienced faster growth in recent decades than rail, road, and shipping. 'They pollute the environment, and the closer you live to those environments, the more negative it is on public health,' said Antoine Thompson, CEO and executive director for GWRCCC. Data provided by GWRCCC at Tuesday's meeting showed a combined 622 private and public airports between Maryland and Virginia. Virginia began considering sustainability strategies at its airports earlier than other states. The commonwealth has a total of 406 public and private airports, 400 of which are privately owned. In July 2016, the Virginia Department of Aviation (VDOA) commissioned the Virginia Airports Sustainability Management Plan — a voluntary guide for Virginia's public airports to define their own sustainability priorities and needs. Rusty Harrington, chief planner with VDOA, was one of the contributors to the plan. 'We have so many people that are working in parallel, and (the meeting) has been an opportunity for us to see what everyone else is working on and find some mutual common ground opportunities,' Harrington said. Beyond SAF, Harrington noted that researchers also exploring advancements in engine technology, as well as the use of using electrification and hydrogen resources. As for Virginia's role in environmental stewardship, Harrington said the commonwealth is taking it very seriously. 'We want to protect the resources that we have, and we want to lessen our impacts in almost every activity we do — from design, construction, operation, maintenance of our airports — with the goal of securing and balancing the economic, the environmental and the social impacts of any of our actions,' Harrington said. 'We like to think we're doing a very good job of that because it's inherent in whatever we do in airport development.' The coalition has not yet set a date for a future meeting. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

Virginia's federal lawmakers want to make childbirth free
Virginia's federal lawmakers want to make childbirth free

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Virginia's federal lawmakers want to make childbirth free

(Photo by Getty Images) Childbirth can cost thousands of dollars, with certain conditions also posing extra costs for parents-to-be who have private health insurance. New legislation proposed by Virginia's Capitol Hill lawmakers and their colleagues could prevent cost-sharing for prenatal, childbirth, neonatal, perinatal and postpartum care, keeping families from being saddled with big bills after birth. U.S. Rep. Jennifer McClellan, D-Richmond, remembers the stress and fear of dealing with placenta previa, a life-threatening maternal condition, when carrying her second child, Samantha. Her placenta wasn't in the right position, placing her and her fetus at risk and spurring a cesarean section birth and neonatal intensive care unit stay for the baby once it was born. She also remembers the extra medical costs that were associated with managing the condition to keep both herself and her daughter alive. The condition is rare but tricky if it develops later in pregnancy as McClellan's did, and exemplifies how costly maternal care can be, especially if there are complications or emergencies. Bipartisan and bicameral legislation she helped create would provide birth-related benefits similar to the ones offered by Medicaid to Americans who are covered by private health insurance. Reducing out-of-pocket costs like copays can help more families stay on top of monitoring conditions to prevent crises and be better able to respond when they do arise, McClellan said. 'The idea here is this will help get more people in for prenatal and preventative care so that hopefully you will have fewer emergencies,' McClellan explained. U.S. Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Virginia, said if the measure becomes law, it would represent a big shift in maternal health care for the country. 'Childbirth should be free in the United States, and that's a big idea,' Kaine said , who is a co-patron of the Senate version of the bill. That's already the case in some countries, while in others like Finland, France and Great Britain, costs are curbed for expecting families and efforts to reduce maternal and infant mortality rates have proven successful. Applying the concept to America is something that Vice President J.D. Vance (who also serves as president of the Senate) has previously been on board with, Kaine said. Last year, Kaine workshopped the idea with then-Sen. Vance before he was tapped to be President Donald Trump's running mate. Kaine then connected with Sens. Cindy Hyde-Smith, R-Mississippi, Josh Hawley, R-Missouri, and Kirsten Gillibrand, D-New York, to introduce the bill this year. 'Bringing a child into the world is costly enough without piling on cost-share fees that saddle many mothers and families with debt,' Hyde-Smith said in a statement announcing the legislation. 'By relieving financial stresses associated with pregnancy and childbirth, hopefully more families will be encouraged to embrace the beautiful gift and responsibility of parenthood.' The House and Senate versions of the bill can unify the 'left and the right, the 'pro-choice' and the 'pro-life,'' Kaine said, adding that the measures could fare well in the nation's legislative branch and end up on Trump's desk. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

MORNING GLORY: Antisemitism is shameful and evil. None of us should ever be neutral on such hate
MORNING GLORY: Antisemitism is shameful and evil. None of us should ever be neutral on such hate

Fox News

time2 hours ago

  • Fox News

MORNING GLORY: Antisemitism is shameful and evil. None of us should ever be neutral on such hate

An attack on any Jew in America is an attack on every Jew in America. It does not matter if the victim of the intended violence was murdered, maimed or escaped unharmed. It does not matter in the least if the targeted Jew was an American, an American-Israeli, a Jew from a third country, or a gentile mistaken for a Jew or an Israeli, or a supporter of either the Jewish people or the state of Israel. The perpetrators of the violence are all evil. Deeply evil. Diseased in mind and soul. Their accomplices, whether in the display of action or via expressed or unexpressed sympathy —and including the apologists thereof attempting to explain motives — all are evil. As a Catholic Christian, I believe in Hell. Those who indulge antisemitism in act or word or in the silence of their mind are headed to Hell absent genuine repentance. For antisemitism is the exact opposite of Christian beliefs and practice. The "Church, mindful of the patrimony she shares with the Jews and moved not by political reasons but by the Gospel's spiritual love," stated the document, "Nostra Aetate of the Second Vatican Council in 1965, "decries hatred, persecutions, displays of antisemitism, directed against Jews at any time and by anyone." So, let's hear this in some homilies this Sunday and from the pulpits of Protestant churches. The Catholic Church's doctrine was unequivocal in its condemnation of antisemitism: "At any time." By "anyone." Including, of course, the attacks on Jews in Boulder, Colorado, on June 1, 2025, the murder of two Israeli diplomats in Washington, D.C. on May 21, 2025, outside the Lillian and Albert Small Capital Jewish Museum, and the firebombing of the home of Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro on April 13, 2025. Antisemitism extends far back in the U.S. to the numerous attacks against Jews on American campuses and streets since October 7, 2023, and to the long trail of antisemitic violence before that horrific massacre which came primarily from the far right, including the attack on the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh, on October 27, 2018, and the attack on April 27, 2019, at Chabad of Poway synagogue in Poway, California. The "Unite the Right" rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, in August of 2017, like its predecessor proposed march of the Nazis in Skokie, Illinois, in 1976, are more recent examples. (The march in Skokie never happened but was moved to Chicago after extensive litigation upholding the right of the antisemites to march.) Those are just incidents in my memory. American antisemitism has a long and shameful history. But so too does non-Jewish opposition to antisemitism have a distinguished pedigree which includes, most famously, President George Washington's 1790 letter to the Jewish congregation in Newport, Rhode Island. The "father of our country" wrote then that the new nation he was helping build would give "to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance." President Donald Trump's condemnations of the violence directed at Jews has been equally unequivocal. Good. There has always been clarity on this issue. Too many, however, dodge the horror. Where is the non-Jewish chattering class today? Mostly silent or mumbling or posting attempts to link the criminals to Trump, or Elon Musk or a dozen different excuses. "But, but, but" is the first refuge of the Jew hater afraid to go public. There are some notable exceptions to the quiet or the equivocal. "The Editors" podcast from National Review of June 2, titled "Horror in Colorado," set an excellent bar of condemnation, but it has far too few equivalents in either the conservative or legacy press. Indeed, there are many accomplices to the ancient evil online and in print. Silence is indeed complicity right now, and outright complicity in knowingly platforming antisemitism is especially repugnant at a moment when diseased minds seem poised to follow the examples of the criminals in D.C. and Boulder. Match meet gasoline. Who and where, exactly, is today's equivalent of the French journalist and novelist Émile Zola played a key role in defending Alfred Dreyfus through his famous "J'accuse" open letter, published in the newspaper L'Aurore in January 1898. (If you'd like to learn the outline of the Dreyfus affair, try the excellent 2013 novel by Robert Harris, "An Officer and a Spy." The complicated persecution of Dreyfus can be difficult to trace more than 125 years after the fact, but Harris does it for the reader in an excellent example of the good that historical fiction can do to repair the damage done by the collapse of elementary and secondary education in world history in the U.S.) There are columnists and platforms of note. Have they filed yet? There are athletes and musicians and actors who are quick to rally to popular causes which trigger cascades of virtue signaling. Have they posted? I have yet to see a hashtag or open letter demanding the shaming and shunning of antisemitism in America. Perhaps such a statement is circulating now and about to appear. Perhaps a "We Are the World" is even now being rehearsed, recorded and set for release that will condemn this latest American variant of the ancient evil. Thus far, though, the silence is deafening. Singer-songwriter John Ondrasik of "Five for Fighting" has set the example. Will anyone else from the vast community of media join him? Hugh Hewitt is a Fox News contributor, and host of "The Hugh Hewitt Show" heard weekday afternoons 3 PM to 6 PM ET on the Salem Radio Network, and simulcast on Salem News Channel. Hugh wakes up America on over 400 affiliates nationwide, and on all the streaming platforms where SNC can be seen. He is a frequent guest on the Fox News Channel's news roundtable hosted by Bret Baier weekdays at 6pm ET. A son of Ohio and a graduate of Harvard College and the University of Michigan Law School, Hewitt has been a Professor of Law at Chapman University's Fowler School of Law since 1996 where he teaches Constitutional Law. Hewitt launched his eponymous radio show from Los Angeles in 1990. Hewitt has frequently appeared on every major national news television network, hosted television shows for PBS and MSNBC, written for every major American paper, has authored a dozen books and moderated a score of Republican candidate debates, most recently the November 2023 Republican presidential debate in Miami and four Republican presidential debates in the 2015-16 cycle. Hewitt focuses his radio show and his column on the Constitution, national security, American politics and the Cleveland Browns and Guardians. Hewitt has interviewed tens of thousands of guests from Democrats Hillary Clinton and John Kerry to Republican Presidents George W. Bush and Donald Trump over his 40 years in broadcasting. This column previews the lead story that will drive his radio/tv show today.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store