logo
Dinner parties, listening and lobbying. What goes on behind closed doors to elect a pope

Dinner parties, listening and lobbying. What goes on behind closed doors to elect a pope

ROME — Rome is bustling with jasmine blooming and tourists swarming. But behind closed doors, these are the days of dinner parties, coffee klatches and private meetings as cardinals in town to elect a successor to Pope Francis suss out who among them has the stuff to be next.
It was in this period of pre-conclave huddling in March of 2013 that Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, the retired archbishop of Westminster, and other reform-minded Europeans began pushing the candidacy of an Argentine Jesuit named Jorge Mario Bergoglio. Their dinner-table lobbying worked, and Pope Francis won on the fifth ballot.
Cardinal Vincent Nichols may have inherited Murphy-O'Connor's position as archbishop of Westminster. But he's not taking on the job as the front-man papal lobbyist in these days of canvassing of cardinals to try to identify whom among them should be the next pope.
'We're of quite different styles,' Nichols said Friday, chuckling during an interview in the Venerable English College, the storied British seminary in downtown Rome where Nichols studied in the 1960s. 'Cardinal Cormac would love to be at the center of the party. I'm a little more reserved than that and a little bit more introverted.'
Nevertheless, Nichols, 79, provided an insider's view of what's going on among his fellow cardinal-electors, between meals of Rome's famous carbonara — as they get to know one another. They all descended on Rome to bid farewell to the pope and are now meeting informally before the start of the conclave on Wednesday.
Nichols says he is spending these days, before he and his fellow cardinals are sequestered, listening. The routine calls for cardinals to meet each morning in a Vatican auditorium to discuss the needs of the Roman Catholic Church and the type of person who can lead it. These meetings are open to all cardinals, including those over 80, while the conclave itself in the Sistine Chapel is limited to cardinals who haven't yet reached 80.
With the exception of an afternoon Mass — part of the nine days of official mourning for Francis — the rest of the day is free. Cardinals have been seen around town taking walks or eating out, trying to remain incognito.
Nichols said a picture of the future pope is beginning to emerge, at least in his mind, as cardinals look back at Francis' 12-year pontificate and see where to go from here.
'I suppose we're looking for somebody who even in their manner not only expresses the depth of the faith, but also its openness,' said Nichols.
Pope Benedict XVI named Nichols archbishop of Westminster in 2009, but he didn't become a cardinal until 2014, when Francis tapped him in his first batch of cardinals. Francis went on to name Nichols as a member of several important Vatican offices, including the powerful Dicastery for Bishops, which vets bishop nominations around the world.
'My experience so far, to be quite honest with you, is there's a lot of attentive listening,' Nichols said. 'That's listening to the people who might have an idea today of who they think is the best candidate, and I wouldn't be surprised if by Monday they might have changed their mind.'
Nichols said the picture that is emerging is one of seeing Francis' pontificate in continuity with the more doctrinaire papacies of St. John Paul II and Benedict XVI, and of appreciating the multicultural reality of the Catholic Church today. Francis greatly expanded the College of Cardinals to include cardinals from far-flung places like Tonga and Mongolia, rather than the traditional centers of European Catholicism.
Yes, divisions and disagreements have been aired. 'But I can never remember a time when Catholics all agreed about everything,' Nichols said. 'We're not a boys' brigade that marches in step.'
But he said he sensed that cardinals believe Francis' reforming papacy and radical call to prioritize the poor and marginalized, to care for the planet and all its people, needed further consolidating with another papacy.
'There's a sense that the initiatives that this man of such originality took, they probably do need rooting a bit more to give them that stability and evident continuity,' Nichols said. 'So that these aren't just the ideas of one person, one charismatic person, but they are actually consistently part of how the church reflects on humanity, our own humanity and our world.'
In his book 'The Great Reformer,' Francis' biographer Austen Ivereigh described the 2013 conclave and how Nichols' predecessor, Murphy-O'Connor, and other reform-minded Europeans seized the opportunity to push Bergoglio after it was clear the Italians were fighting among themselves over the Italian candidate.
'Team Bergoglio,' as these reform-minded cardinals came to be known, had tried to talk up Bergoglio in the 2005 conclave, but failed to get their man through after Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger's momentum grew and Bergoglio bowed out — leading to the papacy of Benedict XVI.
In 2013, with many too old to vote in the conclave, Team Bergoglio talked up the Argentine at dinner parties around Rome in the days before voting began. The aim was to ensure Bergoglio could secure at least 25 votes on the first ballot to establish himself as a serious candidate, the book said.
'The Great Reformer' recounts a dinner party at the North American College, the U.S. seminary in Rome, on March 5, 2013, to which Murphy-O'Connor and Australian Cardinal George Pell were invited and where the British cardinal talked up the qualities of a possible first Latin American pope.
'He held a number of these dinners, and I think there were a few of them involved, a few who had grown convinced that Bergoglio was what the church needed,' Ivereigh said Friday.
Nichols doesn't have any such calculations or preferred candidate, at least that he is willing to share.
'For me, it's no good going into a conclave thinking it's like a political election and I want my side to win. I'm not going to do that,' he said. 'I'm going to go in certainly with my own thoughts but ready to change them, to listen and maybe try and persuade others to change theirs too.'
Winfield writes for the Associated Press.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Report: Russian Sabotage Operations In Europe Have Quadrupled Since 2023
Report: Russian Sabotage Operations In Europe Have Quadrupled Since 2023

American Military News

time14 minutes ago

  • American Military News

Report: Russian Sabotage Operations In Europe Have Quadrupled Since 2023

This article was originally published by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and is reprinted with permission. Russia has dramatically increased sabotage operations throughout Europe, a new report has found, with the number of attacks targeting critical infrastructure nearly quadrupling since 2023. The findings, by the International Institute for Strategic Studies, dovetail with a growing number of press reports, indictments, and intelligence warnings alleging Moscow has made covert sabotage and surveillance operations a major priority, aimed at destabilizing European governments. 'While Russia has so far failed to achieve its primary aim, European capitals have struggled to respond to Russian sabotage operations and have found it challenging to agree a unified response, coordinate action, develop effective deterrence measures and impose sufficient costs on the Kremlin,' the report by the London-based think tank said. The scope of so-called hybrid attacks blamed on Russia includes arson attacks, incidents where ships have damaged undersea communications cables, disruption of GPS satellite navigation signals, and the hacking of computer infrastructure. The bulk of the targets, the report released August 19 found, are in Ukraine or are connected to European efforts to support or supply Ukraine with military and other civilian hardware. The uptick of incidents coincided with Russia's all-out invasion of Ukraine, launched in February 2022, and spiked in 2023 and 2024, quadrupling over that period. The report also tallied a slowdown in attacks in the first half of 2025, though it was unclear exactly what that could be attributed to. European and other Western governments have expelled dozens of Russian intelligence officers, many working under diplomatic cover, dating back to before the Ukraine invasion. That has forced Russian agencies to turn to proxy or mercenary-type of operations, where people are hired, some unwittingly, to carry out sabotage or other operations. Last month, a British court convicted three men of setting fire to a London warehouse where Ukrainian-bound equipment was being stored, a plot prosecutors said was orchestrated by operatives linked to the Russian mercenary company Wagner. In a related incident, three Ukrainians have been accused of trying to set fire to properties linked to British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. 'Russia has exploited gaps in legal systems through its 'gig economy' approach, enabling it to avoid attribution and responsibility. Since 2022 and the expulsion of hundreds of its intelligence officers from European capitals, Russia has been highly effective in its online recruitment of third-country nationals to circumvent European counter-intelligence measures,' the report said. There was no immediate response to the report from Russian officials. European governments have also under-invested in maintaining security systems for critical infrastructure, the report said, even as fears mount that the covert campaign could be part of a longer-term effort by Russia. 'Some NATO member states have assessed Russia's unconventional war to be part of its long-term preparations for a potential military confrontation with NATO,' the report said.

Russia says discussing Ukraine security guarantees without Moscow 'road to nowhere'
Russia says discussing Ukraine security guarantees without Moscow 'road to nowhere'

Yahoo

time17 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Russia says discussing Ukraine security guarantees without Moscow 'road to nowhere'

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Wednesday that discussing any Western security guarantees for Ukraine without Russian involvement was a "road to nowhere". NATO military chiefs were set Wednesday to discuss the details of eventual security guarantees for Ukraine amid efforts to broker an end to Russia's offensive. But Lavrov warned that "seriously discussing security guarantees without the Russian Federation is a utopia, a road to nowhere. "We cannot agree that it is now suggested to solve collective security issues without the Russian Federation," he told reporters. President Vladimir Putin ordered Russian troops into Ukraine on February 24, 2022 and the ensuing conflict has killed tens of thousands of people and forced millions to flee their homes. US President Donald Trump, who spoke Monday with his Russian counterpart, said Putin had agreed to meet Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and accept some Western security guarantees for Ukraine. Lavrov said in their phone call Putin had only told Trump he would "think about raising the level of" talks on Ukraine. Lavrov said any summit between Putin and Zelensky "must be prepared in the most meticulous way" so the meeting does not lead to a "deterioration" of the situation around the conflict. Lavrov also accused European leaders -- some of whom also visited the White House on Monday -- of making "clumsy attempts" to change the US president's position on Ukraine. "We have only seen aggressive escalation of the situation and rather clumsy attempts to change the position of the US president," he said, referring to Monday's meeting. "We did not hear any constructive ideas from the Europeans there," Lavrov added. Lavrov also said the West's "confrontational position, a position to continue the war, does not find understanding in the current US administration, which... seeks to help eliminate the root causes of the conflict". Post-war security is a key concern for Ukraine after more than three years of Russian offensive. Moscow has long said it will not tolerate Kyiv joining NATO and has been hostile to the idea of Western troops being deployed to the war-torn country. bur/dt/jj Solve the daily Crossword

The future of the ‘special relationship' between the US and UK
The future of the ‘special relationship' between the US and UK

The Hill

timean hour ago

  • The Hill

The future of the ‘special relationship' between the US and UK

Anyone who works in British foreign policy knows that we talk about 'the special relationship' with the U.S. infinitely more than Americans do. But there is a straightforward reason: it really matters to us. It is not just an emotional response, nor an attempt to cling to great-power status. Those are lazy and only partial explanations. The International Relations and Defence Committee in the House of Lords is currently conducting an inquiry into the U.K.'s future relationship with the U.S. In the evidence I submitted, I said very clearly that the U.S. is Britain's most important bilateral ally, in terms of trade, defense, intelligence, diplomacy and myriad cultural and historical connections. But that relationship is always evolving. What Socrates said about the unexamined life applies just as well to unexamined policy assumptions — and in international affairs particularly, nothing is unchanging. The Coalition for Global Prosperity is a nonpartisan group launched in 2018 by former Prime Minister David Cameron and ex-Defence Secretary Penny Mordaunt. It argues for three inseparable pillars in British foreign and security policy: an effective development budget, active diplomacy and a strong defense strategy. Last month, it published a report titled ' Transatlantic Ties: U.K.-U.S. Relations to 2045,' which examines the changing political landscape and proposing ways for the U.K. to strengthen and renew the alliance. (Full disclosure: I was recently appointed senior fellow for national security at the group, but I took the position after the report had been written and had no involvement in its content.) Donald Trump's return to the presidency has shifted U.K.-U.S. relations in ways that have sometimes been uncomfortable for Britain, and which have put new strain on the relationship between our two countries. The report acknowledges that Britain needs to increase its defense expenditure and footprint as part of a fairer burden-sharing. London also has to appreciate Washington's very different perspectives on matters like trade and tariffs, Ukraine and international aid. Disagreements will remain, but they can be managed, provided they are properly understood. Underpinning the report's recommendations is what Alexander Stubb, the president of Finland, recently described as a 'reverse-Kennedy' in the age of Trump. European nations should 'ask not what the Americans can do for you, ask what you can do for America.' This does not mean accepting any kind of military or diplomatic vassalage, but identifying areas of common interest where the U.K. can use its particular influence or capabilities for mutual benefit. The report recommends that, while the British government must meet the new NATO defense spending target, it should go further and show leadership, setting out a concrete plan for increasing expenditure on core defense commitments to 3.5 percent of GDP by 2030, well in advance of the agreed upon 2035. No one seriously doubts that the British armed forces need this kind of investment, but putting ourselves ahead of the curve would make a powerful statement of intent to partners and adversaries alike. America's focus on China as the principal threat to its interests over the coming decades is shaping policy across the board, shifting the strategic focus towards the Indo-Pacific. China presents itself as an alternative ally and patron for smaller nations — think of the Belt-and-Road Initiative and Chinese-sponsored maritime facilities in Cambodia, Peru and Sri Lanka. The report urges the U.K. to do much more to challenge this narrative, highlighting China's human rights abuses, repression and self-interest. The U.K. is well placed in this respect because of its membership in so many overlapping forums, including the United Nations, NATO, the G7, the Council of Europe, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, the World Trade Organization and the Commonwealth. The other recommendations concern what are called 'minilateral' organizations, combinations of a small number of countries to achieve specific, limited objectives. There are several areas in which this approach offers real opportunities: Pillar Two of the tripartite AUKUS agreement, on research, development and production of new technologies; the Joint Expeditionary Force, the U.K.-led alliance of 10 European states that provides rapid response and expeditionary capability in the Baltic and the Arctic region; a proposal to develop a U.S.-U.K.-led minilateral group for 'a radical rethink about priorities and mechanisms of development.' There are two fundamental messages underpinning this. The transatlantic relationship has brought huge benefits to both countries. The U.K. cannot assume it will endure through the simple momentum of history, but it can work to strengthen and renew the relationship through specific, discrete projects that will yield tangible benefits for both countries. This would include an increase in defense spending; taking a harder public line on China; proving how AUKUS can deliver even more for its participants; and inviting U.S. observers to Joint Expeditionary Force summits, so they can see what Europe is doing independently to strengthen its security. Yes, Trump is transactional and wants to see how America gains from every situation. The U.K. has to be focused on issues where it can deliver. If that sounds less elevated and more businesslike than the Atlantic Charter or the emotional bond of the Reagan-Thatcher years, it is only a reflection of a new reality. Eliot Wilson is a freelance writer on politics and international affairs and the co-founder of Pivot Point Group. He was senior official in the U.K. House of Commons from 2005 to 2016, including serving as a clerk of the Defence Committee and secretary of the U.K. delegation to the NATO Parliamentary Assembly.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store