Could an African cardinal become the next pope? Don't rule it out.
As the Catholic Church's College of Cardinals enters the conclave to select the next leader of the church Wednesday, one of the most pressing questions is what part of the world that leader will come from. While Cardinal Luis Antonio Tagle from the Philippines is considered to be a front-runner, known for his affable style and karaoke skills, there has been buzz about the possibility of an African pope. The Catholic population has exploded on the continent, and an estimated 20% of the world's Catholics live there.
Gelasius, who reigned from 492-496, was the last pope who hailed from Africa. And there are Africans in today's College of Cardinals who are papabile (pope potentials).
The selection of a new pope is always dramatic, but tensions arose this time even before the conclave began. There were reported leaks of conversations held at General Congregation, a meeting of the cardinals held prior to the conclave. According to unnamed sources to America Magazine, some cardinals complained about Pope Francis' papacy, especially regarding his involvement of the laity in the church. Some cardinals believe that the administration of church affairs should be held only by the ordained. These complaints come from cardinals and conservatives hoping to claw back some of the power to the West — Francis was from Argentina — for which they compiled a profile of cardinals they consider acceptable.
These cardinals may have a hard time electing the kind of pope they want, though, because Francis appointed 108 of the 133 cardinals who'll be involved in selecting the next pope. There may be a lot of chatter about a conservative or liberal pope, but Francis has stacked the deck with cardinals from all over the world.
While an African pope would be a historically stunning development, one of the drawbacks is that no African cardinal holds a major office in the Vatican. That said, Cardinal Fridolin Ambongo Besengu of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Cardinal Robert Sarah from Guinea and Cardinal Peter Turkson of Ghana are three candidates to watch.
Besengu, the archbishop of Kinshasa, was appointed by Francis in 2019. At 65, he may be considered a bit too young to be pope. (Generally, electors don't like to pick someone that young as it can have a long-term effect on church polity and politics). As bishop in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Besengu stood up against President Joseph Kabila's attempts to push back elections, which bodes well for his willingness to push back against autocratic leaders. He is staunchly against homosexuality. When Francis issued a Fiducia Supplicans that allowed for same-sex blessings, Besengu followed with a statement that was explicitly opposed, stating along with some other cardinals who signed, that there'd be no same-sex blessings in Africa.
Though Cardinal Robert Sarah from Guinea is papabile, his notoriety as a strict conservative make him something of a wedge candidate who'd potentially divide groups. Appointed at age 34 as the bishop of Conakry, the 79-year-old theological hard-liner became embroiled in scandal in January 2020 for a book, 'From the Depths of Our Hearts,' supposedly co-written by Sarah and Pope Benedict XVI. The problem was that the emeritus pope did not agree to co- author that book, and his name was dropped from the publication.
Cardinal Peter Turkson, 76, archbishop of Cape Coast in Ghana, is also papabile. He was appointed as cardinal by Pope John Paul II in 2003, which may make him amenable to those who want a pope who was not appointed by Francis. Turkson is the chancellor of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences and the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences. He defended Francis' same-sex blessings decision and, unlike many clerics in Africa, is against the criminalization of homosexuality, putting him at odds with Ghana's bishops and Ghana's political establishment that has made it illegal to identify as an LGBTQ person. Turkson has also been at the forefront of speaking about climate change and the environment, which puts him in line with Francis on those issues.
Anything is possible when considering who is papabile. But as the saying goes, you go into the conclave a pope, you come out a cardinal. In other words, don't assume anything.
While it would bring great joy to not only the continent of Africa, but also to persons of African descent around the world, it may be difficult in this current conclave to elect a pope from Africa. While Francis shrewdly stacked the College of Cardinals, it may be hard to get consensus around candidates who are so divergent in opinions and skill sets. But for some among the African faithful, even having their cardinals considered is a win.
This article was originally published on MSNBC.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Chicago Tribune
2 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
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
In African universities, Russia's war against Ukraine finds new supporters
The halls of academia have long been considered sanctuaries of critical thinking, intellectual discourse, and the pursuit of truth. Universities across the globe pride themselves on fostering environments where diverse perspectives can be examined, debated, and understood through the lens of scholarly rigor. However, the Russian invasion of Ukraine has exposed a troubling trend within certain African academic institutions: a marked bias toward Russian narratives that undermines the very principles of academic integrity and intellectual honesty that universities claim to uphold. This bias is not merely an abstract concern about geopolitical alignment; it represents a fundamental betrayal of the educational mission that universities exist to fulfill. When academic institutions abandon objectivity in favor of political positioning, they fail their students, their communities, and the broader pursuit of knowledge that defines higher education. The stakes could not be higher as universities shape the minds of future leaders, policymakers, and citizens who will navigate an increasingly complex global landscape. When African academics present papers at international conferences that uncritically repeat Russian talking points, they undermine their own credibility and that of their institutions. Across various African universities, a concerning pattern has emerged since Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Rather than maintaining the scholarly distance necessary for objective analysis, numerous institutions have embraced narratives that closely align with Russian state propaganda. This manifests in multiple ways: academic conferences that present one-sided perspectives on the conflict, research publications that uncritically amplify Moscow's justifications for the war, and classroom discussions that frame the invasion through the lens of Western imperialism rather than examining it as a clear violation of international law. Read also: Ukraine must look beyond the EU for its agricultural future The roots of this bias are complex and multifaceted. Historical ties between the Soviet Union and various African nations during the Cold War era have created lingering sympathies that some academics appear unable to separate from contemporary realities. Additionally, legitimate grievances about Western colonial history and ongoing concerns about neocolonialism have been exploited to create false equivalencies between Russian aggression and Western influence. Some academics have conflated criticism of Western policies with support for Russian actions, creating a dangerous intellectual blind spot. Economic factors also play a role. Russian investment in African educational infrastructure, scholarship programs, and research partnerships have created institutional relationships that some universities appear reluctant to jeopardize through objective analysis of Russian actions. This economic dependence has compromised academic freedom, creating situations where financial considerations override scholarly integrity. The influence of Russian state media and disinformation campaigns cannot be overlooked. RT (formerly Russia Today) and Sputnik have specifically targeted African audiences with sophisticated propaganda operations designed to shape public opinion. Unfortunately, some academics have proven susceptible to these narratives, either through genuine belief or through a misguided sense that amplifying Russian perspectives represents intellectual diversity. When universities abandon objectivity, the consequences extend far beyond the ivory tower. Students who receive biased education are ill-equipped to understand complex global issues, make informed decisions as citizens, or contribute meaningfully to policy discussions. They graduate with skewed worldviews that may influence their professional and personal choices for decades to come. The credibility of African scholarship suffers when institutions are perceived as politically motivated rather than academically rigorous. This damages the reputation of African universities in international academic circles, potentially limiting collaboration opportunities, research partnerships, and the mobility of African scholars. When African academics present papers at international conferences that uncritically repeat Russian talking points, they undermine their own credibility and that of their institutions. True intellectual independence requires the courage to analyze situations objectively, regardless of political pressures or historical sympathies. Perhaps most importantly, bias in academia contributes to the broader information warfare that authoritarian regimes wage against democratic values and international law. Universities that should serve as bastions of critical thinking instead become unwitting participants in propaganda campaigns designed to undermine global stability and human rights. The situation becomes particularly problematic when considering the humanitarian dimensions of Russia's war against Ukraine. Hospitals, schools, and civilian infrastructure have been deliberately targeted by Russian forces, creating a refugee crisis that has displaced millions of people. When universities fail to acknowledge these realities or attempt to justify them through geopolitical frameworks, they implicitly endorse violence against civilians and violations of international humanitarian law. African universities must recommit to their fundamental mission of pursuing truth through rigorous scholarship rather than serving as vehicles for political propaganda. This transformation requires several concrete steps. First, universities must establish clear guidelines for faculty regarding the difference between legitimate academic analysis and political advocacy. While scholars should be free to examine controversial topics from multiple perspectives, they must do so within frameworks that respect evidence, logic, and established principles of international law. Second, African universities must diversify their funding sources and partnership arrangements to reduce dependence on any single country or ideological bloc. The current situation, where some institutions appear reluctant to criticize Russian actions due to financial relationships, represents an unacceptable compromise of academic independence. Read also: Hiding in plain sight — how Russia's cultural centers continue to operate in US, Europe despite espionage claims Third, universities must invest in media literacy and critical thinking education for both faculty and students. The susceptibility of some academics to Russian disinformation campaigns reveals significant gaps in the ability to evaluate sources, identify propaganda techniques, and distinguish between credible and manipulated information. Fourth, African universities must strengthen their commitment to international academic standards and peer review processes. When scholars publish work that fails to meet basic standards of evidence and argumentation, it reflects poorly on the entire African academic community. Rigorous peer review can help ensure that African scholarship maintains the quality necessary for international respect and collaboration. The pro-Russian bias evident in some African universities represents more than just a misguided political position; it constitutes a surrender of intellectual independence to foreign propaganda. This is particularly ironic given that many of these same institutions pride themselves on their commitment to African independence and self-determination. True intellectual independence requires the courage to analyze situations objectively, regardless of political pressures or historical sympathies. It means acknowledging uncomfortable truths about allies while maintaining the ability to critique opponents fairly. Most importantly, it means refusing to sacrifice scholarly integrity for political convenience. African universities have a proud tradition of intellectual leadership, from their role in anti-colonial movements to their contributions to post-independence development. This legacy is endangered when institutions abandon their commitment to truth in favor of political positioning. The current moment represents a critical test of whether African higher education will live up to its historical role as a force for enlightenment and progress. The stakes extend beyond the immediate question of how to analyze Russia's war against Ukraine. Universities that compromise their integrity on this issue signal their willingness to subordinate academic standards to political considerations more broadly. This has implications for everything from scientific research to economic analysis to social policy development. African universities stand at a crossroads. They can continue down the path of political bias, sacrificing their integrity for short-term political or economic gains, or they can lead by example by recommitting to the principles of scholarly objectivity and intellectual honesty that define higher education at its best. The choice is not merely about how to analyze one particular conflict; it is about the fundamental purpose and character of African higher education. Universities that choose bias over objectivity risk becoming irrelevant to serious academic discourse and ineffective in their mission to educate future leaders. The world needs African universities that can contribute meaningfully to global conversations about complex issues. This requires institutions that maintain high scholarly standards, resist political pressure, and commit themselves to the pursuit of truth regardless of where it leads. Read also: Can South Africa lead the charge for nuclear safety in Ukraine? Submit an Opinion Editor's Note: The opinions expressed in the op-ed section are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Kyiv Independent. We've been working hard to bring you independent, locally-sourced news from Ukraine. Consider supporting the Kyiv Independent.
Politico
3 hours ago
- Politico
A muted backlash to Trump's new travel ban
What up, Recast fam. On today's agenda: Donald Trump's newest travel ban is an indication he's become more sophisticated in deploying his immigration agenda during his second swing through the White House. In 2017, when a freshly inaugurated Trump — then a political novice — issued his haphazard and sweeping executive order banning people from Muslim-majority nations, it incited chaos at airports and drew widespread protests from critics who called it racist and an executive overreach. Legal challenges prevented the full scope of that initial ban from being implemented, but ultimately a watered down version was upheld by the Supreme Court the following year. The newest ban, which targets mainly African and Middle Eastern nations, went into effect on Monday and has a decent chance of making it through the courts. (More on that momentarily.) But the most notable shift from Trump's first term was the muted response from the public on the new ban, which fully restricts people visiting the United States from Afghanistan, Burma, Chad, the Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen, and imposes partial restrictions on people from Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan and Venezuela. One reason may be that the ban's implementation comes amid the escalating tensions in Los Angeles over Trump's unilateral deployment of National Guard troops and Marines into the city to restore order after protests against ICE raids. But it may also be that the president's opponents are overwhelmed by other episodes. 'There's just so many attacks coming from the Trump administration on all fronts,' said Kerri Talbot, co-executive director of the Immigration Hub. 'It is a little different since it's not the only thing they're doing when they're doing dozens of different actions,' she added, which includes mass deportations of migrants in the U.S. to El Salvador without first going through immigration courts. Was The Recast forwarded to you by a friend? Don't forget to subscribe to the newsletter here. You'll get a weekly breakdown of how race and identity are the DNA of American politics and policy. Others argue Trump and his aides have simply gotten more savvy in implementing his travel ban. The president's first-term ban applied to citizens from eight nations traveling to the U.S. and went into effect immediately — meaning those en route to the country or who had not left domestic airports when the order was issued were detained there. The proclamation issued last week is far more methodical and does not apply to those with existing legal status in the U.S. Further, the newest order cited perceived risks to national security, high rates of visa overstays and lax vetting protocols of the foreign nations as justifications for the ban. Those policy tweaks may have contributed to why there's been a less spirited critique of these new travel restrictions and why the effort might hold up in court. 'It's not an emergency like what he created in 2017,' said Edward Ahmed Mitchell, national deputy director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, which sued the administration over its first-term ban. 'I think there will be some time for reactions to pile up. But again, because this ban doesn't have any instant impact — in particular, people already have legal status — I think that's why you're not going to see the same reaction you saw in 2017 with mass protests breaking out at airports.' Others criticize congressional Democrats for being flat-footed on the immigration messaging, saying their statements railing against the ban will not cut it. 'There's no strategy, no conversation, no decent talking point,' said Nana Gyamfi, executive director of Black Alliance for Just Immigration. 'I think this would be an issue that a congressperson would give a damn about.' Some immigration advocates also criticize Trump in particular for going after Haiti, the poor, majority-Black nation that is approximately 600 miles south of Florida's shores and is heavily reliant on U.S. aid. Guerline Jozef, the co-founder and executive director of Haitian Bridge Alliance, recalled how Trump famously referred to Haiti as one of the 'shithole' nations during a 2018 White House meeting with a bipartisan group of senators where they were discussing details of an immigration lottery program. Trump at the time suggested the U.S. needed to admit more people from places like Norway instead. Jozef said Trump's recent refugee resettlement of white South Africans to the U.S. is evidence that he's not changed his attitude toward majority-Black nations. 'The [administration's] main goal is to create pain, trauma and terror, instead of welcoming people with dignity [from] the countries they have put in the list,' she said. 'They continue to intentionally create those policies … that are centered in the destruction and the unwelcoming of Black people.' We'll continue to monitor how this latest immigration ban and the ongoing clashes in Los Angeles continue to play out. All the best,The Recast Team NEW JERSEY GOV PRIMARY Nearly a dozen candidates are vying for the Democratic and Republican nominations to replace Phil Murphy, New Jersey's term-limited governor. As my colleagues Madison Fernandez and Danial Han point out, this primary contest is the most competitive in recent history, with the Democratic side appearing to be a bit more up in the air than the GOP contest. Rep. Mikie Sherrill is seen as the betting favorite to secure victory in today's Democratic primary, which is expected to draw a relatively low turnout. Newark Mayor Ras Baraka, however, earned national attention last month when he was arrested during a demonstration with several lawmakers who were attempting to inspect Delaney Hall, a privately operated federal immigration detention center that Democrats and progressive activists accused of violating safety protocols. Other candidates in the crowded primary field include Jersey City Mayor Steven Fulop, Rep. Josh Gottheimer, New Jersey Education Association President Sean Spiller and former state Senate President Steve Sweeney. Trump, of course, looms large in the GOP primary. He endorsed Jack Ciattarelli, a former state representative who narrowly lost to Murphy four years ago. His chief opponent is Bill Spadea, a former radio host who also is claiming the MAGA mantle. New Jersey is just one of two states holding statewide elections in the fall. The other is Virginia, and while the latter is considered the more swingy of the two, Trump made traditionally blue New Jersey's contest far closer than predicted in the 2024 presidential election, losing to Kamala Harris there by just 6 percentage points. Polls close at 8 p.m. Eastern. WHAT WE'RE WATCHING THIS WEEK HOGG TIRED — There continues to be fallout from the extraordinary admission from Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin that 'I don't know if I wanna do this anymore.' POLITICO's Holly Otterbein obtained a Zoom recording from last month where Martin described his deep frustration over DNC Vice Chair David Hogg's vow to drop $20 million to oust Democratic lawmakers in safe seats that Hogg sees as ineffective. And more: FIRST IN THE RECAST – The National Hispanic Leadership Agenda, a leading coalition of Latino civil rights and advocacy organizations sent a memo to top Senate Republicans, including Majority Leader John Thune, expressing their 'grave concern' and demanding a course correction on the president's 'big beautiful bill' currently before Congress. 'Latino communities, who disproportionately work in lower-wage jobs that do not offer employer-sponsored health insurance, will be especially affected,' the coalition writes in their memo, arguing the hundreds of millions of dollars in Medicaid cuts will be detrimental to their communities. 'The narrative that these cuts are necessary to eliminate 'fraud and abuse' is both misleading and dangerous,' the letter continues, 'These families are not abusing the system—they are surviving because of it.' TODAY'S CULTURE RECS Sly Stone tributes — Considered one of the 1960s' most groundbreaking musicians, Sly Stone, born Sylvester Stewart and the leader of the band Sly and the Family Stone, which blended rock, R&B and soul music, died Monday. He was 82. Read about him here, and check out this listicle featuring the group's essential hits. Stephen A. Smith and Jon Stewart chop it up — Sports broadcaster Stephen A. Smith, who is said to be flirting with a presidential run, sat down for an extended segment Monday night on 'The Daily Show.' 'Hamilton' is celebrated at the Tony Awards — Check out the OG cast reuniting for a rocking performance. Misty Copeland retires — The barrier-breaking ballet dancer is ready for her next chapter. She reflects on her storied career with the AP.
