Latest news with #pope
South China Morning Post
27-05-2025
- Entertainment
- South China Morning Post
Why some royals wore white to the inaugural mass of Pope Leo XIV, from Queens Letizia to Sofía – but what unconventional shade did Queen Elizabeth wear to meet Pope Francis?
It is customary to wear black in front of the pope, and as politicians and Europe's royals gathered in St Peter's Square in The Vatican on May 18, most adhered to the tradition. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and first lady Olena Zelenska both opted for dark attire, while US Vice-President J.D. Vance and his wife Usha Vance also chose sombre shades, with the second lady also wearing a black mantilla, the traditional veil worn by women during mass. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky (centre) receives applause from attendees as Pope Leo XIV mentions the situation in Ukraine during his inaugural mass in Vatican City on May 18. Photo: EPA-EFE Advertisement So why were a handful of the women from Europe's royal families clad in virgin white? The answer is a long-held custom held by the Catholic Church called the 'privilège du blanc' – the privilege of white – that permits select Catholic queens and princesses to wear white in the presence of the pontiff. Currently, there are only seven women in the world who can exercise this right: Princess Charlene of Monaco, Queen Sofía and Queen Letizia of Spain, Queen Paola and Queen Mathilde of Belgium, Grand Duchess Maria Teresa of Luxembourg , and Princess Marina of Naples. Here are some all-white looks the royals have worn in the pope's presence. King Felipe VI (right) and Queen Letizia of Spain attend the inauguration of Pope Leo XIV. Photo: IPA via Zuma Press At the pontiff's inaugural mass, Queen Letizia wore a white Redondo dress along with a white lace veil. Monaco's Prince Albert and Princess Charlene arrive for the inaugural mass of Pope Leo XIV. Photo: Reuters Princess Charlene of Monaco, the first Monégasque princess to wear white in front of the pope, also wore a white veil and an icy hued midi-length Elie Saab dress.
The Standard
24-05-2025
- Politics
- The Standard
Cardinals set for second day of conclave to elect a new pope
People line up to enter St. Peter's Basilica at the Vatican, on the first day of conclave to elect the new pope, as Cardinals are displayed on a screen, as seen from Rome, Italy May 7, 2025. REUTERS/Alkis Konstantinidis
Yahoo
17-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Perspective: Christians must withstand temptations to compromise their faith
Whenever a new pope is elected, the mainstream secular media is abuzz with speculation about his politics and ideology. Is the pope conservative or liberal? What does he believe about particular political figures, parties, or movements? Did he favor the election of Donald Trump or Kamala Harris as the U.S. president? More insidiously, many journalists and commentators seek to manipulate the new pontiff's first public words in light of the prevalent ideological trends in our culture: Does the pope's message that the church welcomes all people, sinners included, mean that the Catholic Church will revise its teachings on marriage? Sexuality? Abortion? Euthanasia? Will it get in line with the dogmas, whatever they are, prevailing among the day's cultural elites? The implicit message is clear: faith — whether that of the people in the pews or of the leaders of the Christian community — can be cleanly divided into ideological categories. 'Progressive' Christians and a 'progressive' pope, for example, believe in inclusion, diversity, non-judgmentalism, and ensuring that all those pesky dogmas and doctrines don't make anyone feel uncomfortable. On the other hand, those 'conservative' and 'traditionalist' Christians are 'reactionaries' who unduly prioritize doctrine and seek to exclude those who in various ways fall short of doctrine's requirements. To this way of thinking, what makes a faithful Christian is not the universal confession of faith and the lifelong struggle to adhere to faith's demands. Christianity can, rather, be taught and practiced in divergent ways according to one's political or ideological preferences. I suppose we ought not to be surprised by the fact that many religious folks are swept along by cultural trends, even trends that are manifestly antithetical to biblical principles and the firm and constant teaching of scripture and tradition. 'Twas ever thus. (Indeed, 'twas thus for the ancient Hebrews, too, as scripture makes more than abundantly clear.) And Christians who fall in line with a trend find ways to say that the trend, whatever it is, is compatible with Christian faith — even dictated by it. It's hard for human beings to actually be countercultural, and Christians are human beings just like everybody else. We make a million excuses for going along with what's wrong — and pretty soon we find ourselves going along with calling it right. So when Marxism is in vogue, there will be self-proclaimed Christian Marxists (perhaps doing business as 'liberation theologians'). When fascism is fashionable, there will be self-identified Christian fascists, as there were under Mussolini in Italy, for example. When racial subordination and segregation is the cultural norm, there will be some who seek to baptize it (these voices may even come from within the church: consider the three prominent Louisiana Catholics who were excommunicated in 1962 by Joseph Rummel, then archbishop of New Orleans, for distorting Catholic doctrine to try to justify their opposition to racial desegregation). When eugenics is popular among the cognoscenti, there will be Christians claiming that eugenic practices and policies constitute authentic Christian love in practice. If polyamory becomes the next cause embraced by the cultural elite — as seems to be gradually occurring — we will start hearing about the Christian case for group marriage: 'God is love! And God teaches us to love one another, instead of keeping our love confined to just one other person.' And on and on. Why does this constantly happen? Well, being the frail, fallen, fallible human beings that we are, we crave social acceptance and we like to fit in. Moreover, we human beings are naturally influenced by the ways of thinking favored by those who are regarded by the predominant culture as sophisticated, up-to-date and important. When push comes to shove, it's quite difficult to be true to the Christian faith — the social and personal costs are too high. We who are Christians praise the martyrs and honor their memories, but we are loath to place in jeopardy so much as an opportunity for career advancement, or the good opinion of a friend — much less our lives. So we tend to fall in line or at least fall silent. We deceive ourselves with rationalizations for what, in truth, amounts to either conformism or cowardice. We place the emphasis on whatever happens in the cultural circumstances to be the acceptable parts of Christian teaching and soft-pedal or even abandon the parts that the enforcers of the day's cultural norms deem to be unacceptable. We make a million excuses for going along with what's wrong — and pretty soon we find ourselves going along with calling it right. But the Gospel's demands call us to something higher. Jesus says, 'If you want to be my disciple, you must take up your cross and follow me.' To be sure, the Lord offers mercy to those who, though they yielded to the intense pressures and temptations to deny him or his precepts, later return, like the prodigal son. This is Christianity's true and unadulterated teaching. God's mercy is abundant, yes, and with mercy comes the opportunity for repentance — but to authentically repent for the times we have denied the Lord to please the world, we must rescue ourselves from the palatable half-truths and watered-down faith that the secular culture incessantly urges us to adopt. Robert P. George is McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence and Director of the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions at Princeton University.
Washington Post
16-05-2025
- Politics
- Washington Post
Reader critiques: The Post's ‘pope slot machine' was deeply offensive
Every week, The Post runs a collection of letters of readers' grievances — pointing out grammatical mistakes, missing coverage and inconsistencies. These letters tell us what we did wrong and, occasionally, offer praise. Here, we present this week's Free for All letters. To associate the election of a pope with pulling the lever on a slot machine is one step above crap-shooting with Christianity. 'The world's holiest wager,' read the headline on a May 8 Style article. 'Instead of betting on college sports, try your luck on the College of Cardinals,' a secondary headline suggested. Gambling on election outcomes is an age-old pastime, but promoting it in the case of this ceremony is ludicrous. I guess the artist could have made the illustration wider and the operating lever longer, to symbolize the cardinals 'pulling the lever' again and again with each vote. Alternately, the artist could replace the miters on the reels with Bibles. Then use a small miter for the top of the lever. Keep your thumb on God. John Hebbe, Fairfax Station Michael Ramirez hit a new low with his May 9 editorial cartoon, 'An American pope,' depicting the newly elected pope garbed in stars and stripes. Did Ramirez intend to celebrate with American Catholics? Does he understand how offensive his cartoon is to non-Catholic Christians struggling against Christian nationalism? Does he recognize what his cartoon signals to millions of Americans who do not happen to be Christian and who depend on the separation of church and state to protect their rights? Clara M. Lovett, Chevy Chase The misuse of the word 'America' seems to have spread from the White House, misnaming the Gulf of Mexico, to coverage of Pope Leo XIV. Contra the May 9 front-page headline 'First American pope is chosen,' he is not the first American pope. That honor belongs to his predecessor. Why? Because Francis was born in Argentina and was therefore South American. Hence, Leo should be identified as the first North American pope. Jay Levy, Takoma Park Thank you for putting the May 11 article 'Japanese American GIs are feted as 'saviors' 80 years on' on the front page. As the world is becoming more divided, it is important to remember those who have fought and sacrificed for democracy and the just treatment of all people. Through everything they endured in the United States, Japanese American soldiers gave the 442nd Regimental Combat Team the reputation as 'the most decorated unit for its size and length of combat service in the history of the U.S. military.' America's strength is realized only when we all support one another despite our backgrounds. I believe the majority of legal immigrants come here to become model citizens and to support this country. If you don't like what America stands for, then don't come; no one is forcing you to be here. But we should remember that what makes our country strong and unified is the people. Fortunately, as shown in this little-known piece of history, in times of crisis, people step up and do the right thing to help others. I can only hope that our politicians will follow in their path: Wake up, do your jobs and start working together. Adrian Fremont, Alexandria The May 7 Metro obituary 'Soulful novelist had a mordant wit' memorialized a writer of remarkably poignant humor, Jane Gardam of England, who elevated my continuous amazement at how we are enriched by books. One evening some time ago, my all-male book club in Baltimore was discussing 'Old Filth' and my wife sneaked down to the landing to eavesdrop. Our conversation ended on a question about Edward Feathers, the 'Old Filth' of the title: British colonial, empire lover, lawyer, judge, betrayed husband, wit and bit of a twit, tragicomically thrashing through having lost his wife, Betty, as she gardened. Our book club's question: Did Feathers avoid intimacy, or was he incapable of it? My friends left, and my wife, Betsey, had one comment on what she'd overheard: 'I didn't think men could think like that.' Thanks, Jane Gardam. Stan Heuisler, Baltimore Oh, come on! There were three men in the photo accompanying the May 7 Metro article 'NFL commissioner is working all angles to get stadium deal completed,' but you ID'd only two. That would have been bad enough on its own, but you left out the good-looking one! Leonora Weimer, Bowie Barbara Vuk's April 26 Free for All letter, 'Telling it like it will be,' argued that 'old age stinks' and 'someone needs to say it without sugarcoating.' Vuk highlighted something that's been bugging me for a long time, especially in those 'Good news!' newsletters: the fetishizing of older adults ('Awww! They got married! Ain't it cute?'), including the hero-making of exceptions to the rule ('Awww! This old person lifted more weight than 95 percent of adults in the world! And so can you!' Hint: No, you can't.). Gag me. I'm with Vuk. The media highlights this stuff at the expense of the reality of how aging works for most of us, regardless of what we might do to keep healthy. It's as though the culture is so frantic about the possibility of not 'aging well,' whatever that means, that we must not only focus on the exceptional but also drive ourselves toward it. The thud that hits everyone lucky enough to live long enough to discover that they will not perpetually feel 35, no matter what they do, too often comes as shock. And yet, that's the picture that confronts the majority. Denise Showers, Janesville, Wisconsin I noted the patrilineal histories of the Kentucky Derby entrants in the May 3 Sports section ['Before they Run for the Roses, get to know them']. Probably there is merit and even some quantitative data on the predictive power of such lineages. But perhaps consideration should include the mares as well. Mitochondria, the energy sources in cells, are inherited solely via the female ancestral line. A deep look at how the efficiency of their mitochondria affects the performance of horses and other athletes would yield some valuable information on the physiology of competition. George Hoskin, Burtonsville The May 9 Metro article 'He can't speak aloud, but his artwork says it all,' on a nonverbal local painter, was inspiring. Not only an artist but also a poet, Charles Lenny Lunn proves that sheer will, brilliance and empowerment by a devoted parent, with the help of doctors, therapists and teachers, can move mountains — in eloquent contradiction of the ignorant, defeatist comments of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Jan H. Kalicki, Alexandria I'm wondering whether I missed an executive order declaring May 4 as OCD Sunday, because the top five tiles on my Post app were all about cleaning, or faking cleaning, or not being messy, or some such, and yet another farther down was on the same theme. Seriously? Not a word about Israel, Gaza, Ukraine, tariffs, economic news. Is this the new 'we're all about the markets' Washington Post? I consume as many Procter & Gamble products as the next guy, but this is ridiculous. Andrew Kuhn, Bedford, New York The May 7 front-page article 'Prison proposal gets rocky response' quoted Aaron Peskin, a former member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, as saying, 'The chances of Alcatraz becoming repurposed as a prison are about as large as landing a man on Pluto.' No doubt. President Donald Trump said a lot of newsworthy things at his May 5 news conference besides the reiterated suggestion to reopen Alcatraz. The Post chose this one to publish front-page, center, above-the-fold, continuing to nearly three-quarters of Page A2, with coverage from two reporters and two huge photos of tourists visiting the site. Trump's spaced-out idea deserved this much attention? Joseph A. Capone, Oakton Regarding the May 6 online headline 'Trump wants to reopen Alcatraz. Californians are deeply skeptical.': Everyone should be beyond 'deeply skeptical.' The prison is a crumbling wreck that was useful more as a PR prop than as anything else and always cost tons of money to operate. No sensible person would even think to resurrect it except for show — or to distract attention from more serious things. Gail Goldey, Santa Fe, New Mexico Throughout history, the word 'republican' has been used to describe political systems and their advocates that radically reject kings, autocrats and tyrants. The Latin root of the word, 'res publica,' means 'the public affair,' as opposed to a private affair serving the interest of one person. By this and other measures, our 'Republicans' are no more 'republican' than King George III was an American revolutionary. Let's call the Republican Party by its real name: the Monarchist Party. Gerson S. Sher, Washington It is dismaying that presumably self-described liberal readers of The Post object to any inclusion of letters defending the Trump administration ['Readers wondered why we asked for Trump voters' views. Here's why.,' May 8]. This attitude seems decidedly illiberal, and it calls to mind a decades-old quote from William F. Buckley Jr.: 'Though liberals do a great deal of talking about hearing other points of view, it sometimes shocks them to learn that there are other points of view.' Larry Ciolorito, Darnestown I request that The Post stop using the term 'conservative' to refer to right-wing politicians, including supporters of President Donald Trump. These politicians and their associated pundits are not demonstrating anything like conservatism, in the sense defined by Edmund Burke in the 18th century and probated in the United States by Robert Taft, Barry Goldwater and William F. Buckley Jr., nor in the nonpolitical sense of conserving traditions, heritage, resources and land. Noting a politician's party affiliation is objective identification, but 'conservative' is a word with value associations, as are 'progressive' and 'liberal.' Such terms inadequately describe politicians' actions, tendencies, policies or interests. Readers rely on journalists to use words for what they mean rather than how they've been adopted, adapted and owned. Howard Mandel, Chicago I'm hooked on reading the print edition online. Available no matter where I am in the world at the moment. Razor-sharp visuals, including beautiful photography. Enlargeable with a pair of fingers. Nothing to toss in recycling afterward. But way too often, photos appear only in black and white. On May 9, my temper finally blew when a photo caption accompanying the Metro article 'Trump names five board members' identified a woman in a group shot by noting she was the one 'in red pants' — in a black and white photo. Does not compute! David Sproul, Bethesda As someone who values informed citizenship and the media's role in shaping public discourse, I write to express my concern about how executive orders are often reported. It's disheartening and misleading to hear these orders presented as if they were laws. Executive orders are directives to enforce existing laws or manage the executive branch. They do not create new laws. The Constitution clearly outlines that Congress makes laws and sets the budget (Article I), while the president's role is to 'faithfully execute' these laws (Article II). The Constitution vests all legislative powers in Congress, which includes passing laws, approving treaties and controlling government spending. Executive orders cannot override Congress, and The Post should not treat them as being able to. Arthur Grau, New York The 7 newsletter seems to be morphing into The 10 or The 12. The articles meander from one topic to another. Topics mentioned in the headline are getting buried. Rather than trying to condense more than seven into The 7, consider changing the name to Today's Top 10. Cheryl Nicolson, Hydesville, California I don't like the use of 'congressman' instead of 'representative.' When I was a student at Powell Junior High School in D.C. years ago, we would get chastised for it. Senators are congressmen also. Usage changes but not always for the better. Arnold Malhmood, Rockville Regarding the May 13 news article 'White South Africans designated as refugees reach U.S.': Please don't call the White people being brought from South Africa into the United States 'refugees.' They are not. Even mentioning the president's deceitful language diminishes the experiences of the hundreds of thousands of actual refugees around the world. Susan Wallace, Washington I and many of my wine-enjoying friends miss the weekly wine column that appeared in the Food section. Dave McIntyre, who left The Post in January, was and is an excellent writer, offering notes and descriptions of wines available in the area. Surely, The Post can find a replacement. Robert Luskin, Bethesda Presumably, The Post includes 'Prickly City' on its comics page to be inclusive of various political opinions. But the May 5 comic depicting an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent throwing one of the strip's characters into a van was deeply offensive. The Trump administration has admitted to sending at least one person to El Salvador in error but seems to be doing everything in its power to resist bringing him home. The upshot is that anyone (not just those who are undocumented) is at risk of being sent to a maximum-security prison overseas without recourse. Please reconsider your inclusion of this strip in The Post. Anne Schwartz, Washington Readers often write in to say they find some cartoons in the Comics section not so very funny. May I suggest they also seek humor in other parts of Style — and other parts of the paper as well? See this paragraph in the April 21 Style article 'Who's the woman set to change the Smithsonian?': 'Here we are: A former Fox News host is leading the Pentagon. A vaccine skeptic is running the Department of Health and Human Services. A former professional wrestling executive is head of the Department of Education.' If that doesn't crack you up, you are either too highbrow or too lowbrow to appreciate the real-life irony being presented. Who's on fourth? The Fourth Estate, of course! Skip Strobel, Washington
Irish Times
12-05-2025
- Politics
- Irish Times
Inside the conclave: how a quiet American became pope
The cardinals electing a new pope to lead the Catholic Church left the Sistine Chapel exhausted and hungry. A meditation to start the conclave had dragged on and pushed their first vote deep into Wednesday evening. It had resulted in an inconclusive tally, with three main contenders. Keeping their vow of secrecy, they returned to Casa Santa Marta, the guest house where they were sequestered without their phones, and started talking. Over dinner, as one gluten-free cardinal picked over vegetables and others shrugged at the simple fare, they weighed their choices. Cardinal Pietro Parolin (70), the Italian who ran the Vatican under Pope Francis , had entered the conclave as a front-runner but hadn't received overwhelming support during the vote. The Italians were divided, and some of the cardinals in the room had become bothered by his failure to emphasise the collaborative meetings that Francis prioritised for governing the church. Cardinal Peter Erdo of Hungary (72), backed by a coalition of conservatives that included some African supporters, had no way to build momentum in an electorate widely appointed by Francis. READ MORE That left Cardinal Robert Francis Prevost (69), a quiet American dark horse who had surprisingly emerged in the evening's vote as a source of particular interest. Cardinal Pietro Erdo of Hungary and Cardinal Pietro Parolin of Italy. Photograph: Vincenzo Pinto/AFP via Getty Images A missionary turned religious order leader, turned Peruvian bishop, turned Vatican power player, he checked many of the boxes that a broad range of cardinals hoped to fill. His seeming ability to be from two places at once – North and South America – pleased cardinals on two continents. As the prelates sounded out the Latin American cardinals who knew him well, they liked what they heard. During the dinner, Prevost avoided any obvious politicking or machinations, cardinals said. By the next morning, he had transformed into an unsuspecting juggernaut who ultimately left little room for rival candidacies and ideological camps. 'You begin to see the direction and say, 'Oh my goodness, I'm not going to use my five days' worth of clothes,'' joked Cardinal Pablo Virgilio Siongco David of the Philippines. 'It's going to be resolved very fast.' Interviews with more than a dozen cardinals, who could divulge only so much because of secrecy rules that carry the penalty of excommunication, and accounts from Vatican insiders told the story of how Prevost became Pope Leo XIV. The swift, stunning and taboo-smashing consensus around an American unfamiliar to many outside the church came on Thursday among an unwieldy College of Cardinals with many new members who didn't know one another. They had different interests, languages and priorities, but a single choice. [ The Irish Times view on Pope Leo: continuity and change Opens in new window ] Building Support After the death of Francis on April 21st, cardinals from around the world began arriving in Rome. They joined powerful players in the Vatican who ran the church's bureaucracy, including Prevost, whose career Francis had boosted. Despite his intimate understanding of the Vatican, Prevost was still among the newbies, having been a cardinal not even for two years. And he had questions about the conclave. He turned to one of the reported front-runners, Cardinal Luis Antonio Gokim Tagle of the Philippines, for help. ''How does this work?'' the American said, according to Tagle, who recounted the conversation. 'I had experience in a conclave,' Tagle said, 'and he didn't.' Cardinal Luis Antonio Gokim Tagle of the Philippines. Photograph: Tiziana Fabi/AFP via Getty Images Unlike Tagle, he also didn't have the name recognition considered necessary in an election among so many new cardinals who barely knew one another. Without a high profile or obvious base of support, the Chicago-born Villanova University graduate moved below the radar. 'I didn't even know his name,' David of the Philippines said. But Prevost was not a complete unknown. As the former leader of the Order of St Augustine, which operates around the world, and as the head of the Vatican office overseeing the world's bishops, he had developed powerful connections and backers. First among them had been Francis, who put his career on the fast track. And his decades in Peru , fluent Spanish and leadership of the Pontifical Commission for Latin America gave him deep, and decisive, relationships on the continent. 'We almost all know him. He's one of us,' said Cardinal Baltazar Enrique Porras Cardozo of Venezuela, who has known him for decades. In the weeks before the conclave, the cardinals participated in a series of private meetings to discuss their concerns about the future of the church. Unlike Francis, who made his mark with a short speech sharing his vision for the church, several cardinals said that Prevost's remarks did not stand out. 'Like everyone else,' said Cardinal Juan José Omella Omella of Spain. Cardinal Jean-Paul Vesco of France, the archbishop of Algiers, also could not recall what the American had said, but he got to talk to him on the sidelines of the meetings – which was important, he said, because he was increasingly being talked about as a candidate based on his 'incredible' resume, fluent Italian, reputation as a moderate and connection to Francis. The cardinal started asking around to people who had worked with the American to vet him, and learned that he listened and worked well in groups. 'I did my job,' Vesco said. 'I have to vote. I have to know the person.' Cardinal Wilton Gregory of the United States also said that Prevost had engaged 'quite effectively' in the smaller group discussions with cardinals. Those more intimate settings played to Prevost's strengths, as he had gained a reputation around Rome as a studiously prepared, collegial and organised collaborator, especially as a top Vatican department head. Cardinals attend a mass on Wednesday for the election of pope. Photograph:'I just admire the way he runs a meeting,' said Cardinal Blase J Cupich of Chicago, his hometown. 'I mean, that's hard to do, when you've got people of different language groups and cultures, and you're trying to advise a pope on who should be a bishop, and you're listening to all those people.' On Saturday, May 3rd, five days before the conclave, the cardinals drew lots and assigned key roles. With 127 of the 133 who ultimately voted in attendance, Prevost was chosen to assist in running the daily meetings before they were sequestered and voting began. As the different factions argued in those daily meetings about the future direction of the church, the cardinals from the Americas seemed to coalesce around him. Cardinal Timothy M Dolan of New York, an outspoken and gregarious figure, said he tried to get to know his fellow American better at a breakfast. Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Muller of Germany noted an electoral base that seemed to be forming, saying, 'It's a good number of cardinals from South America, North America.' Porras of Venezuela said that cardinals from Latin America and the United States seemed on the same page about Prevost. 'When you have friendship first,' he said, 'everything is easier.' The more the cardinals learned about Prevost, the more they liked, cardinals said. 'Bob, this could be proposed to you,' Cardinal Joseph W Tobin of Newark, New Jersey, said he told Prevost soon before the conclave began. Prevost had a lot of the experience they were looking for, said Cardinal Vincent Nichols of England. He had the heart of a missionary, scholarly depth and knowledge of the world. He had run a diocese as a bishop, which put him in close contact with parishioners, but had also worked in the Curia, the Roman bureaucracy that helps govern the church. It did not escape the cardinals, Nichols said, that Parolin, the Vatican's top diplomat, who was being pushed by his supporters in and out of the conclave, had deep experience only in the church bureaucracy. 'We're not stupid,' he said. [ 'Never again war': Pope Leo makes plea for peace in Ukraine and Gaza Opens in new window ] Quickly Shifting Fortunes On Wednesday, after a long and solemn procession into the Sistine Chapel, the cardinals gathered at their assigned seats and took their vows. Just before 6pm the doors closed for the beginning of the conclave. The meditation at the start, remarks on the gravity of the task at hand, ran about an hour, so long that Parolin, who was running the conclave, asked them if they wanted to call it a night and delay the first vote until the next morning. 'We didn't have dinner, and there were no breaks – toilet breaks – either,' said David of the Philippines, but the group decided that it wanted a vote. As voting got under way at about 7.30pm, the delay, with no explanation to the outside world, caused a stir among the waiting crowds. It seemed perhaps that the cardinals had already picked a pope who was getting dressed to come out on to the balcony. Instead, the first vote that night amounted to what Omella of Spain called 'a bit of a preliminary poll'. 'In the first vote, there were several candidates who won significant votes,' Cardinal Lazarus You Heung-sik of South Korea said, according to the South Korean news agency Yonhap. Vatican insiders said that those candidates included Parolin, Erdo and Prevost. That's when the cardinals returned to the guest house and started discussing the strengths and weaknesses of the men. 'Once we're in Santa Marta, there was talk about individual candidates,' Nichols of England said. 'That's what we're supposed to do.' Muller of Germany, a prominent conservative critic of Francis whom the late pope had fired from his position as the church's top doctrinal official, said he talked to the Latin Americans about Prevost and was told that he was 'not divisive'. The climate for Prevost seemed to be growing increasingly positive. The election was coming to him. The next morning's votes – the second and third of the conclave – made the picture clear. Crowds in St Peter's Square await news from the conclave. Photograph: Filippo Monteforte /AFP via Getty Images 'In the fourth vote, the ballots overwhelmingly shifted' to Prevost, You of South Korea said. Muller sat behind the American front-runner in the Sistine Chapel and noticed that he seemed calm. Tagle, who sat next to Prevost, noticed him taking deep breaths as votes amassed in his favour. 'I asked him, 'Do you want a candy?' and he said 'Yes,'' Tagle said. During one of the votes, Tobin, as he held his ballot high and put it in the urn, turned and saw Prevost, whom he had known for about 30 years. 'I took a look at Bob,' Tobin of New Jersey said, 'and he had his head in his hands.' Later in the afternoon, they voted again, then counted the ballots one by one. When Prevost reached 89 votes, the two-thirds majority threshold needed to become pope, the room erupted in a standing ovation. 'And he remained seated!' David said. 'Somebody had to pull him up. We were all teary-eyed.' As the counting continued and the votes for Prevost neared triple digits, Parolin had to ask them to sit down so they could finish. 'He obtained a very, very large majority of votes,' Cardinal Désiré Tsarahazana of Madagascar said. After his election, cardinals enthusiastically congratulated the new pope. A short and uncontentious conclave was over and Leo XIV stepped through the crimson curtains on to the balcony of St. Peter's Basilica and the world stage. Tagle, the one-time favourite who days earlier had been asked by the American about the rules, told him: ''If there's anything you want to change about the conclave rules – it's all in your hands now.'' - This article originally appeared in The New York Times . Newly elected Pope Leo XIV arrives on the main central balcony of St Peter's Basilica. Photograph: AFP via Getty Images
