“Thus Would We Elect Pope Ratzinger”

by Lucio Brunelli

1. “Sunday April 17. I checked into my room at the Casa Santa Marta in the afternoon.
Setting down my bags, I attempted to open the Persian blinds, because the room was dark.
I was unable to do so. One of my brothers addressed the housekeeping sisters about the problem, thinking it a technical problem. They explained to him that the blinds had been sealed.
Seclusion of the conclave… A new experience for almost all of us. Out of 115 cardinals, have previously participated in the election of a pope.”

So begins the diary of an influential cardinal who has recorded not only his overall impressions but also the results of the four votes that Benedict XVI to office. Obviously we cannot reveal the author: we came into possession of the document thanks to a relationship of trust that has developed over the years.

Until now very few leaks have filtered out on the course of the conclave that chose John Paul II’s successor. Those that have emerged have been contradictory, for example on the actual role played by Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini. Finally it is possible to attempt the first complete reconstruction of the 24 concealed hours that gave the Catholic Church its 265th pontiff.
A unedited picture emerges of the election of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. On the third vote, the minority, reluctant to vote for the former prefect of the faith, formed a bloc over the Argentine cardinal, Jorge Maria Bergoglio, reaching 40 votes: too few to elect the first Latin American pope in history, but sufficient to prevent reaching the 77 votes required to elect the pope (115 – 40 = 75). “The result of the conclave, for a few hours, after the third vote on Tuesday morning, April 19th, seemed to remain open.”

But before providing the background of the conclave, a brief word on the nature and reliability of the information on which this reconstruction is based. How precise can an account of the votes based on the memory of the participants be?
At the beginning of each vote, a ballot is distributed to each of the 115 cardinals as well as a sheet of paper containing the names of all the contenders. Following each vote, both are returned and placed in the old cast-iron stove of the Sistine Chapel. Many cardinals, however (including the author of this diary), upon returning to the Casa Santa Marta, immediately record the result of the vote.

And the obligation of secrecy? Our sources were conscious of violating at least in part an assumed commitment. If they have agreed to anonymously make this research possible, it is because they believed in the historical rather than scandalous intention of this work. The imposition of secrecy by the popes was intended to protect the freedom of the conclave, as any news released during or before the votes, with the “polling stations” still open, could influence successive rounds of voting. We believe a violation of secrecy post factum to be less grave. Here there is no possibility of altering what has already passed into history.

page 1 of 3 | next page »