Many media sources are now opining on a short list of supposed likely candidates to be the next Roman Pontiff. Such persons are often termed “Papabile” or Pope-able. In reading these lists, I find many of these candidates to be highly unlikely to be chosen. They are Un-Pope-able, in my view. Lists with my comments follow.
ABC News [source] Short List:
“Erdo, 72, the archbishop of Budapest and primate of Hungary, was twice elected head of the Council of European Episcopal Conferences, in 2005 and 2011, suggesting he enjoys the esteem of European cardinals who make up the biggest voting bloc of electors.”
No. The Cardinal-electors, those Cardinals who vote in a papal conclave, would not choose any candidate who was politically controversial. The Church wishes to avoid having Catholicism impacted negatively by the nationality of the successor Pope. So an EU Pope, other than from Italy, is unlikely.
In addition, the very liberal papacy of Pope Francis has not set well with many Cardinals. Even when a Cardinal is a supporter of Pope Francis, that does not imply he agrees with the way the Pope runs the Church, nor does it imply that he wishes for a similar successor. The Cardinals are more likely to lean towards a somewhat conservative Pope, to amend some of the perhaps excessively liberal decisions of Francis. The E.U. and U.S. are known for having many liberal Cardinals, obviously with some exceptions.
“Marx, 71, the archbishop of Munich and Freising, was chosen by Francis as a key adviser in 2013. Marx later was named to head the council overseeing Vatican finances during reforms and belt-tightening. The former president of the German bishops’ conference was a strong proponent of the controversial “synodal path”…”
That’s a big No. The synodal path was unsuccessful from both a liberal and conservative perspective. To conservatives, it marked a possible excuse to depart from traditional teachings. And in fact some openly heretical German clergy attempted to depart from Church teachings by use of the idea of a synodal path – something even the liberal Pope Francis rejected. To liberals, the two-year Church synod resulted in nothing that they wanted from the Synod. The final document was not authoritative and changed nothing. Two years of consultation with the laity and clergy bore no significant fruits.
Also, Marx would not be chosen because he was close to Francis. The Cardinals, even those leaning to the left, likely want an end to the unpredictable decision-making and somewhat ambiguous teachings of Pope Francis. So his close advisors would not receive any consideration from the Cardinal-electors. In addition, Marx is from Germany, which is the location of a major attempt at schism and heresy as condemned by Francis.
“Ouellet, 80, of Canada, led the Vatican’s influential bishops office for over a decade, overseeing the key clearinghouse for potential candidates to head dioceses around the world. Francis kept Ouellet in the job until 2023…”
No. Ouellet is too closely associated with Francis and would not receive the votes of any conservative or moderate Cardinals. Also, a Pope from Canada would be associated with Canadian politics, and therefore possibly with political conflicts between Canada and the U.S., China, and other nations.
“Parolin, 70, of Italy, has been Francis’ secretary of state since 2014 and is considered one of the main contenders to be pope, given his prominence in the Catholic hierarchy. The veteran diplomat oversaw the Holy See’s controversial deal with China over bishop nominations and was involved — but not charged — in the Vatican’s botched investment in a London real estate venture that led to a 2021 trial of another cardinal and nine others.”
That explanation from ABC news reads like an explanation of why he would have no chance of being elected Pope. He was too closely associated with Francis, was involved in the much-criticized China compromise, and narrowly avoided being charged in a financial scandal. In addition, the Cardinals appear to still prefer Pope to be chosen from outside of Italy, reflecting the universal nature of the Church.
Prevost: “The idea of an American pope has long been taboo, given the geopolitical power already wielded by the United States. But the Chicago-born Prevost, 69, could be a first. He has extensive experience in Peru, first as a missionary and then an archbishop, and he is currently prefect of the Vatican’s powerful dicastery for bishops, in charge of vetting nominations for bishops around the world. Francis clearly had an eye on him for years and sent him to run the diocese of Chiclayo, Peru, in 2014. He held that position until 2023, when Francis brought him to Rome for his current role.”
No chance. He is American, and the Church does not wish to be tied to controversial U.S. political decisions, regardless of whether a conservative or liberal holds the U.S. presidency. Prevost is also too closely associated with Francis.
UPDATE May 8th 2025: Prevost has been elected Roman Pontiff, and so is the current valid Pope. This is very surprising to me, for the above stated reasons. He has chosen the name Pope Leo XIV (14th). His predecessor, Leo XIII, taught at length on the supreme authority of the Roman Pontiff, as in the document Satis Cognitum.
Cardinal Sarah – YES, he is papabile. ABC news says: “Sarah, 79, of Guinea, the retired head of the Vatican’s liturgy office, was long considered the best hope for an African pope. Beloved by conservatives, Sarah would signal a return to the doctrinaire and liturgically minded papacies of John Paul II and Benedict.”
As an older candidate, he has the advantage of likely having a shorter papacy. Cardinal-electors like to have a chance to vote for a new Roman Pontiff more often than once every 25+ years (as in the case of John Paul II). Sarah is a safe candidate in the sense that he will likely not make unpredictable or unusual decisions, as did Pope Francis, for Sarah was a respected Vatican Cardinal. The fact that he is from Africa, and would be the first known black Pope (three other Popes were from Africa, centuries ago, but we don’t know if they were black) will attract the votes of some liberal leaning Cardinals, especially those who did not like the particular liberal decisions of Francis. Sarah is a safe choice for a short stabilizing pontificate that will correct some of the excesses of Francis.
ABC says: “Schoenborn, 80, the archbishop of Vienna, Austria, was a student of Benedict’s, and thus on paper seems to have the doctrinaire academic chops to appeal to conservatives.”
No chance in Hell. Schoenborn is an extremely liberal heretic, who ought to be excommunicated by the next Pope.
“Tagle, 67, of the Philippines, would appear to be Francis’ pick for the first Asian pope.”
No. Too young. Too closely associated with Francis. Plus his Chinese heritage and his nationality in the Philippines would make his papacy too politically controversial.
“Zuppi, 69, the archbishop of Bologna and president of the Italian bishops conference, elected in 2022, is closely affiliated with the Sant’Egidio Community, a Rome-based Catholic charity that was influential under Francis, particularly in interfaith dialogue. Zuppi was part of Sant’Egidio’s team that helped negotiate the end of Mozambique’s civil war in the 1990s and was named Francis’ peace envoy for Russia’s war in Ukraine. Francis made him a cardinal in 2019 and later made clear he wanted him in charge of Italy’s bishops, a sign of his admiration for the prelate who, like Francis, is known as a “street priest.” “
Not at all. Too young. Too closely associated with Francis. Too liberal, as interfaith dialog is controversial between liberal and conservative Catholics. Then his association with the Ukraine war makes him too politically controversial. Also, being characterized as a street priest would be seen as a negative by most Cardinals.
More commentary on who will not be elected Pope is subsequent posts.
Ronald L Conte Jr
the reproach of Christ 
2. As Ron’s post is titled “Who Will NOT Be The Next Pope?” I kept it in this frame, However maybe now is the time to give some prognosis as who might potentially become pope. In two weeks everything will be decided anyway.
Sure everyone of the 130 cardinals could technically be elected. But let remember that technically Every baptized male could be elected pope if he could become bishop. Isn’t it a time for the Sacred College to look beyond its own very narrow circle? Instead of spelling names times and again on each conclave and to form camps and to make the votes rising, to seek faults in candidates, to try to appease this or that side (as if a liberal cardinal can’t shift views once elected pope, or vice versus)… Isn’t it better to look for a genuinely devote bishop, priest, or even a layman (very unlikely, still) who can really make the difference in leading God’s people in these definitely NEW TIMES? I can name a few names, including seers or holy priests, bishops filled with the spirit. But surely the Sacred College knows their names and it will look like I’m promoting someone particular. These people must be included at least theoretically in the discussions among cardinals. As a minimum, I think the metropolitan bishops should be included in the scope of potential candidates for a worthy spiritually rich pontificate. We know the red hats are limited and many metropolitan bishops deserve the red hat and await for years. Well, the billion wide Church CANNOT WAIT YET ANOTHER PONTIFICATE OF 15 YEARS. Cardinalate does not date back to the Apostles either. Much better than just to compare few names who is the lesser evil than the others. Yes let name it, What is listed by the media and what is the likely scenarios, is searching for the lesser evil, for the compromise, for everything but God’s will. Having in mind that several of the papabili are around 70 and can live 20 more years, it might well be the last conclave in the life time of many of us. Or even in the world if a Chastisement is following. Will we seek the lesser evil, the compromise candidate pope if we know he will have to lead us through the Chastisement predicted again and again?
I agree that the Cardinal electors should look beyond their own numbers. They might consider papal candidates from the more experienced Bishops of the Church. God will make the right decision for the Church. Trust the Lord.
Every cardinal who is fluent in Italian is either papabile or a pope maker, save for those who have fringe or sectarian views, but even those who are fringe/sectarian and fluent in Italian will have more influence than those who are fringe/sectarian and are not.
To me, the election of a center-right (these political terms are inadequate but they’re all we have) compromise candidate seems more probable than not. Cardinal Tagle, for example, is fluent in Italian and English and is the highest ranking prelate in a heavily Catholic country where divorce is illegal with his support. His comments on sexual minorities will give Africans pause but otherwise he is the kind of candidate I expect will be elected.
I don’t know Cardinal Pizzaballa’s theological views but he will have influence with his brothers, primarily as an Italian but also as someone who speaks English.
I think the next pope will be a successor of pope Francis’ views. Regardless if we like it or not. Pope Francis shaped an era. In the eyes of the good portion of the 1.4 bln Catholics he is the man identified with their expectations of a good pastor, the man of God. And, despite it may sound irrelevant to the devote catholics, it is not irrelevant for the cardinals that pope Francis’ agenda was applauded by the non catholics alike, by the non christians alike. He is likely to be canonized and soon.
Maybe his successor will differ in style, but he will continue the reforms started by pope Francis. It shouldn’t be understood as “reforms in morals” as most people understand it, rather a thorough reform within the Church structures and ideas how to implement the Gospel better in the modern era.
Who cannot be elected, imo, any African, not because of the African origin but because of the fact that the African bishops signed 100 percent against Fiducia Supplicans. Again, like it or not, most of the cardinals from Europe and Americas will not vote for a potential pontiff with such views. Let remember one of the synods how it were the African bishops a clear minority who stopped a more gay friendly wording. If after all an African cardinal is elected, it could be only cardinal Turcson, and exactly for his liberal social views. But will it be enough? I doubt it.
Cardinal Parolin? Although it may seem logical for him to continue the way of pope Francis, he is too bureaucratic, too dry. I haven’t seen from him any flamboyance, a flow of the spirit. If he is elected he will empty the churches in the West. Who will see in him the leader like the previous three holy popes? I am sorry to say it, but actually no one – neither the liberals nor the traditionalists. If he is chosen as a compromise, it will be the biggest error the cardinals can make. Not a compromise and appeasement but a bold spiritual figigure is what the people want to see on the balcony.
In that respect, cardinal Tagle is the only candidate listed by the Media with the above characteristics, but yes he is just too young.
Before the conclave in 2013 that chose cardinal Bergoglio, another name was mentioned first – cardinal Sherer from Brazil. He didn’t gather majority though. In fact, Bergoglio wouldn’t gather majority either if it wasn’t for cardinal Ouellet to grant him his votes. There was a third name of a Latin American: cardinal Maradiaga. He is now 82 that makes him a non elector. But he could still be elected, partly for the reasons Ron pointed out – the cardinals may simply want to have their say in conclaves more often than every decade or longer. In fact they might have been hoping for, or even promised for the early resignation of pope Francis who used to say he would stay only a few years to do the job he was elected for.
In 2013 the cardinals appointed by St John Paul II and pope Benedict elected a reformer pope to do the reform in the Church they all wanted to be done. Now we have the cardinals appointed by pope Francis who have to decide where the Church goes next, in a reform that stalled not because they didn’t want it but because the bureaucratic heavy machine couldn’t implement it.
Or there will be a split in the Church if the majority goes with an election that seems logical and needed, and the minority does not accept it. If the two wings seek for compromise at all cost, here he is: cardinal PIETRO Parolin who may not even change his name. He will lead the first mass of the novena. He is almost elected. Every media lists him first. The conclave is set for the Earliest Possible Date. Someone is in a hurry. But do we really need the technically proficient secretary of state to become the vicar of Christ Francis II for the next 20 years? And if it happens indeed, what will be the price?
This assessment is far too influenced by a certain US outlook on the papacy of Francis to be of much value. The majority of cardinals do not see the eventual proximity to the late pope as a discriminatory factor. As for cardinal Sarah, his age and physical state ( very limited) speaks against him, as well as his sometimes controversial views on the second Vatican Council- )
https://collegeofcardinalsreport.com/
There is no chance at all that Cardinal Sarah, a man who hoped to impose the ad orientem posture on the entire church, will be elected. The vast majority of cardinals, including many more theologically conservative cardinals and African cardinals who actually live on the continent, do not pine for the restoration of the Tridentine mass, which is one of Sarah’s greatest desires and will be all but guaranteed were to be elected pope.
What are your thoughts in Cardinal Pizzaballa, the Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem?
He is too young at 60 years of age, and his position in Israel, a controversial nation, would also preclude him from being chosen.