My post from 2011 is still valid today. The Next Pope: Cardinal Arinze as Pope Pius XIII (13th)
https://ronconte.com/2011/10/28/the-next-pope-cardinal-arinze-as-pope-pius-xiii/
-
Those who reject the Magisterium, grasp at straws seeking its replacement.
-
Click here for a list of my Roman Catholic theology books and booklets, including books about the future.
-
To read the Kindle versions of my books, without a Kindle device, get the free cloud reader — or — any of the free Kindle reading apps.
The CPDV — my conservative Catholic translation of the Bible, from the Latin Vulgate into English, is available at Amazon.com in Kindle format and online here.
Meta
Subscribe to my RSS Feed. (If you use Google Chrome, first add a Chrome RSS reader or extension.)
the reproach of Christ 
Ron, thanks, however let me disagree with you. The majority cardinals will not elect an African pope, because the majority of the Catholic Church does not belong to Africa. The majority belongs to Latin America. Even less, a conservative African pope.
Cardinal Arinse is now 86, therefore according to today’s rules, he cannot vote or be voted for pope.
Some conservative faithful may say, “then it must be cardinal Sarah, he is just the perfect candidate”…. Frankly, the stir he made with the proposed liturgical change of the post-Vatican II mass (he suggested the priests on all masses to face “east” and to turn their backs to the people) practically puts him out of contest. The old Latin rite is nowhere so popular among the clergy or the cardinals, to bet on that card.
The dubia against Amoris Letitia is another test how many cardinals would go openly conservative. They wouldn’t get even 1/5 of the vote.
I’d rather think of a scenario where a non-cardinal is elected pope. The possible compromise maybe a distinguished archbishop or bishop, or even a priest. (Maybe not a lay person, although nothing forbids that in theory).
For example, Archbishop Krieger of Sao Salvador da Bahia, primate of Brasil https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murilo_Ramos_Krieger Of course, there are many others, I mention him only because it is clear he deserves cardinalate being primate of Brazil, the biggest Catholic country in the world. His predecessors were cardinal Agnelo and cardinal Neves. Like other metropolitan sees, he is just left behind at the expense of Tonga and Mauritius. He is one of the bishops highly devoted to Medjugorje (it is well known his question to pope John Paul II regarding Medjugorje followed by a very favorable answer).
If not choosing a suitable compromise archbishop, the eminent cardinals should look for even stranger choices that only they know (besides the Holy Spirit who, we believe, guides them).
It is clear that the leading figures of the extreme camps, such as cardinal Marx on one side and cardinal Burke on another, besides others, cannot hope to win the conclave for obvious reasons. As long as the cardinal-electors want the Catholic Church to remain one whole, and not to repeat the Avignon history. What happened to much more moderate cardinals that were expected to win the 2013 conclave? They were left aside, in the elaborated process that finally stopped at cardinal Bergoglio. Although not a complete surprise (he scored second in 2005 conclave) it still was a surprise. The rumors leaked in the MSM said, cardinal Ouelett gave him his votes thus making the majority. (still one may wonder, should the cardinals who voted for cardinal Ouelett vote automatically for the one he endorses?)
Today the cardinal electors are much more responsive and responsible to the expectations of the billion wide Church than ever before in history. I believe they already have elaborated schemes inspired by the Holy Spirit, and concrete names to discuss in private, in order to see a better future for the Church than what we see today after 6 years attempts of pope Francis to change it. He was elected to do the change. He had great ideas, blocked by the inertia. Perhaps his successor will implement more of them.
How that all fits to St Malachi…perhaps the new pope will show it himself.
“Cardinal Arinse is now 86, therefore according to today’s rules, he cannot vote or be voted for pope.”
False. He cannot vote, but he can be voted for. There’s no age limit for Pope.
While I am not proficient at Garabandal counting of the popes, St Malachi prophecy is quite well known. If the next pope wants to “fulfill” the prophecy, he simply could take the name “Peter” with the number II. As cardinal Ratzinger took the name “Benedict” to fulfill “The glory of the olive”.
Or, if the next pope does not want to press with expectations of fulfillment of that terrifying prophecy, he may choose another name. As cardinal Bergoglio did not choose the name “Peter” although technically he should be the last in the list of St Malachi. With the resignation (or death) of pope Francis we will go out of Malachi’s list for uncertain time period. And apparently he wouldn’t be Petrus Romanus in that case. We may wonder how many more popes should come before the arrival of Petrus Romanus and the prophecy.
Peter the Roman is every Pope from Pope Francis until the last Pope before Christ returns, for we are about to enter into the tribulation.
Ron, I read your article again, and I admit it has very logical erudite arguments. I respect the intelligent view even when I disagree with it.
The problem with the election of cardinal Arinze (or cardinal Sarah, etc.) is that the reasons you listed are supported by the conservative Minority in the Church. We may want that to be supported by the majority, but it is not. The Dubia support showed it very clearly.
If what you say happens though, it would mean the election of one conservative pope, and a separate election of one pro-Western pope (who could be Brazilian as well). He might not call himself liberal though! The idea of the division between conservative and liberal is very vivid in the USA (also because of political reasons) and much less evident elsewhere.
How do you think the half of all Catholics who live in Latin America, will accept the papacy of an African pope who is also conservative? The Latin American cardinals might be conservative on sexual issues (and I don’t think they are so much so), but the population already show where they stand in countries like Mexico and Argentina. They will revolt in the Church. And let me guess, that would be what the bishops would like to see, to excuse their own actions. Especially after they have Francis Bergoglio one of them, to whom they put so much hope of their era in the Church.
I also can’t imagine how the liberal European cardinals will accept a conservative African pope. And not only the cardinals. See what happens in catholic countries like Ireland and Spain! What is possible in USA with isolated conservative communities who serve the Latin Mass, is not quite the same in Europe. They’d rather start Avignon-2.
What percent of the cardinals will support an African conservative pope, and what percent will support another one, I don’t know. Whatever the percent, if there is a will for revolt, it will happen, the history shows.
An African pope would have to move his see most likely in Côte d’Ivoire, where is already built the largest church in the world, the Basilica of Our Lady of Peace https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basilica_of_Our_Lady_of_Peace It is no coincidence. These things are prepared for decades in advance.
On the other side, the election of another Latin American, this time Brazilian, may lead to moving his see to Brazil, the world’s most populous Catholic country. The basilica of Our Lady of Aparecida is one of the biggest churches in the world. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Basilica_of_the_National_Shrine_of_Our_Lady_of_Aparecida
Of course, other scenarios are possible. But I don’t see how the Holy See will remain in Rome, if Rome is said to be destroyed in two independent major prophecies, St Malachi and the official version of the third secret of Fatima. If that happens, sure the next successors of Peter will have to move out.
And the next pope (or even this one, but I think it is too late for this one) may want to take action in advance. So to speak, to prevent the worst case scenario of the prophecy. Not so much for his own life, after all he is consecrated to God and the physical death should not be a problem for him, as for the sake of the millions who live in the city of Rome.
My view continues to be, there will be a Brazilian pope (may not be archbishop Krieger) because the majority requires that. And if you are right in your very logical reasons about the African pope, then it comes the division of the Church. It is not something that never happened in history. Therefore, no more bishop in Rome, although there will be more successors of Peter.
If the cardinals want to prevent that, they would choose to elect someone who is not cardinal, or even archbishop. I think they will go that road.
An African Pope would not move his See to Africa. Arinze was a Vatican official, previously: prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments. My prediction is that Rome is destroyed after the pontificate of Arinze (Pius 13). Then the Holy See moves to Washington D.C.
And the last comment.. (I hope you will post my comments, and will write what is wrong in them. I think the idea to post an article years ago is to initiate a discussion of who the next pope will be, not just to tell us that it will be the aged cardinal Arinze).
My last suggestion in that row is, there is a danger of not two popes but three. One Latin American, one African, and one Western European (all the West will support him). The views in the different regions of the world are just too different, the problems they face are different, especially of the common Catholics who in many Catholic countries voted public against the teaching of the Church.
I really hope the eminent Cardinals see that danger better than we do, (that was evident on the Synods) and will go forward with the only possible solution: choosing an OUTSIDER not one among themselves. Even better than archbishop would be a holy monk like pope Celestine V. There are enough holy priests, some of them even stigmatics.
The stakes are too high to risk everything in a schism with two or even three “popes”. The moment the minority realizes it cannot get what it wants, it will elect its own pope. Two dozen cardinals gather in a remote place and elect their own pope, believing they are the ones who serve the Lord…it happened in history many times. Let face the truth. Cardinal Bergoglio -pope Francis was the last compromise found among the cardinals themselves. His reform fails, their chance to elect another one among themselves to unite them fails too. They need an outsider. Or they will face three elections: African pope, Latin American pope, and possibly Western pope too.
No, there’s not going to be three elections. A true Pope will be elected, Arinze. And after his Pontificate ends, there will be two elections, a true Pope and an antipope.