Cardinal thinks it is time to end Conclave secrecy - “Pope Francis thoroughly mixed the cards”
“Pope Francis thoroughly mixed the cards” ‒ Cardinal László Német on the conclave
Yes, that is Rupnik art behind him in the reception hall of the Archbishop's Palace, It depicts European saints. 
We were guests of Metropolitan Archbishop of Belgrade, Cardinal László Német, in the Serbian capital on Tuesday. We traveled to him to give Szemlélek a first-hand account of everything that can be shared with the public about the papal conclave. He also spoke about his experiences with Francis and Leo XIV.
The main topics of the interview:
‒ Why were you not happy to learn so many details about Pope Francis’ health?
‒ How similar was the real papal election to the movie Conclave?
‒ What was the reason for the white smoke rising so quickly?
‒ If the gossiping cardinals are threatened with excommunication, how could the voting percentages still be leaked?
‒ What was it like standing behind the new Pope on the balcony of St. Peter’s Basilica?
‒ What are the disadvantages and advantages of the new Pope being born in the United States?
‒ Can Leo XIV bridge the gap between conservative and progressive Catholics?
‒ How does the new Pope’s monastic nickname indicate his ties to North and South America?
– What is your last personal memory of Pope Francis?
– I last saw him live on January 25th at the ecumenical prayer evening in St. Paul’s Basilica. I met him in person on December 7th and 8th of last year at my inauguration as a cardinal in St. Peter’s Basilica.
– I understand that the Pope appointed you as a Cardinal without informing you beforehand. Did you have a chance to ask him why he chose you?
– Unfortunately, no. When he was installed as a cardinal with twenty of my colleagues, there was only a brief greeting. This question was not discussed, but the question of why he had a spot under his eye was. As it turned out later, he had fallen, but we made fun of the situation. We jokingly asked if a priest or bishop had “sucked him in”, to which he replied in a similarly cheerful manner:
“A bishop whom I did not appoint as a Cardinal.”
– As a new Cardinal, how did you experience Pope Francis’s hospital treatment and then his recovery?
– This period was characterized by uncertainty, not least because Pope Francis started many processes, but was unable to complete most of his initiatives. All of this awaits his successor or successors. During his hospital treatment, I felt that he and his doctors were beginning to prepare us for his death. The recording in which he addressed the public from the hospital, in a noticeably very bad condition, with barely understandable articulation, was terrible to listen to.
I would not have published it, after all, there is human dignity in the world.
– I also felt that perhaps it was not appropriate to report on his health in a way that detailed even the most intimate details of his condition. The explanation was understandable, of course: he and the Holy See wanted to prevent rumors in this way. How could the balance have been maintained?
– I don’t know, but the world would have understood the situation even less. But the goal could also have been to show that the Pope is also a human being who can suffer like everyone else, and that illness and death are part of life. In the end, Pope Francis’ life ended in a nice frame. He began his ministry in St. Peter's Square and served until his last breath, doing everything he could to bless the gathering there on Easter Sunday before returning to his Creator the next day, after the feast of the Resurrection.
– The Church also wants to teach about the naturalness of death by not being shy: it also puts the Pope's body on public display. How did it feel to see your fellow bishop, with whom you had been able to speak in person a few months ago, lifeless in an open coffin?
– I had seen my parents laid to rest before, so this was not my first experience of this kind. When I saw him, I noticed, especially on his hands, how many chemicals they must have used to treat the body so that it remained in an uncorrupted state even after days. As for his facial features, it was good to see how calm they radiated. It was a nice experience to pray next to him.
– When asked about the film Conclave in Partizán, he said: he feels that what he saw resembles a real papal election. Now that he participated in it, without revealing any secrets, can you tell us to what extent life confirmed the script?
– The course of the conclave was exactly like in the cinema, since the creators strove for historical fidelity. Just as on the screen, the cardinals talked to each other in real life - even if not in the same, sometimes intriguing way as the film depicts. The purpose of the comments and discussions was to outline what challenges need to be answered in the church, and what kind of character a pope would be suitable for this task. It is no secret that names were also mentioned, since in the end a two-thirds majority, in this case 89 votes pointing in one direction, was needed for a successful election. The peculiarity of this conclave was that Pope Francis thoroughly shuffled the cards: cardinals were appointed from all over the world, so not one, let alone two continents, could have formed a majority. At least three continents were needed. I think this is a good idea, because in this way a broad and diverse coalition was formed behind the new pope.
– What can be attributed to the fact that a result was achieved so quickly, after four rounds?
– It was because the elected pope met the criteria that crystallized during our conversations. He should have missionary experience and spirit, as well as pastoral practice. We were not looking for someone who spent his priestly and episcopal life in offices or in the Roman Curia. He should speak several languages and have work experience on at least two continents. Pope Leo XIV met all of these criteria: he was born in North America, but he spent several decades in South America, and he is also familiar with Europe.
– Previously, the idea was that – in order to avoid a concentration of power – the Pope should not be American. How much has this aspect been brought up now?
– It was hardly mentioned. An American pope could indeed have the disadvantage of being viewed with suspicion by developing countries that are critical of the United States, but Cardinal Prevost served as a bishop in Peru for almost twenty years and knows the local reality well. On the other hand, an American pope has the advantage of being able to give impetus to the ecumenical movement, given the diverse religious landscape of the United States, where Catholics are a minority. Moreover, the American church is ripe for “providing” a Pope, and thus taking on a greater role in the universal church, not just criticizing everything or rising above the great divisions within its ranks.
Cardinal Prevost is a good choice from this point of view as well, and I feel that we are looking forward to a great papacy.
– According to canon law, a cardinal who reveals specific details about the conclave is subject to automatic excommunication. In comparison, how is it possible that the voting percentages have been published after several previous papal elections?
– So that none of the numbers corresponded to reality. They were made up out of thin air.
– Yet the data published in the book by veteran Vaticanist Gerard O’Connor on the election of Pope Francis is recognized by the general consensus of the Church as real.
– That is the exception. There, the data could have come from Pope Francis himself.
– And the Pope can lift the secrecy, of course.
– That is true. He also writes about the votes in his autobiography, but on other occasions, for example, in his speech to the Italian episcopal college, I also heard him reveal details about previous conclaves, going back as far as the elections of Pius XII and John Paul II. I understand, of course, that the goal of the strict rules is to prevent anyone from talking about the so-called losing cardinals after the election of the new pope, but if it were up to me, I would break the secrecy, if only because all sorts of rumors would get a foothold. As happened now.
– So you are saying that there is no basis for the article in The New York Times, which was widely reported here, which speculates on the results of the first round of voting, specifically mentioning Cardinal Péter Erdő?
– Yes. What is written in the article is far from reality. Everyone is speculating and referring to all sorts of information that has no connection with the facts. That is why it would be good if we could talk more freely about how the election took place.
– A question has been bothering me since last Thursday evening. White smoke rises, and then the new pope appears on the balcony of St. Peter's Basilica within an hour. How is that enough time to receive congratulations, change clothes, pray, choose a Papal name, and even write down a proper speech?
– As the voting rounds continue, it becomes increasingly clear who will form a majority. This way, the person has time to think about their name and speech while they are still on the move. Before I went to Rome, several people asked me what name I would take if I were elected. 15 minutes is enough to change clothes, and it is not a big deal to quickly write down or dictate a speech that has been formulated in my head and then print it out.
– How did it feel to stand behind the new Pope on the balcony at such a historic moment?
– It was an uplifting and once-in-a-lifetime experience to see the huge crowd from there celebrating the new Pope with jubilation. This also shows how much people thirst for goodness, for the good news of the Gospel, for unity, for peace; for the world to finally rise above division and war.
– To what extent were you able to sense during the conclave that the Holy Spirit was working through the cardinals?
– I would rather say that I was aware of how important something we were doing. You have to be aware that cardinals are an interesting group, some with extravagant behavior, big mouths, and no small self-awareness.
If there is a divine miracle, it is that such a diverse and even multi-directional college was able to find a common denominator in 24 hours.
– How did Cardinal Prevost react when his name was called for the 89th time in the fourth round?
– When the number of votes began to approach the two-thirds majority, his features became increasingly tense, and then he buried his face in his hands, indicating that he was aware of what awaited him. Then, after the required number of votes, calm spread over him, and we burst into applause. Cardinal Parolin then asked him if he would accept the task and what name he would choose. As I told you in my previous statement, the next day we had dinner together, and he then informed us at the table that he had chosen Leo XIV because he felt that he had adopted the social commitment of his predecessor under that name.
– That was the occasion when you and two of your fellow cardinals approached him because they saw that he was about to spend his dinner alone, and they said that it would not suit him.
– It was interesting to observe how the atmosphere around him changed after we elected him Pope.
It wasn’t him, but the behavior of the other cardinals.
It was as if he had been taken from us and moved at least two floors up. All this is rooted in the history of the church, after all, even a hundred years ago, popes were entitled to the homage due to kings, and since then we have not been able to completely break with this mentality. Of course, today the successor of Peter is still entitled to respect, but unfortunately this also means that the pope almost inevitably isolates himself from his surroundings. Willingly or unwillingly, you start talking to him differently, and of course you can immediately see who wants to take advantage of him and enforce their own interests with him.
– Pope Francis also wanted to live in the Santa Marta House instead of the papal suite, so that he could be among people.
– Yes, that was the saying, but I will tell you that he regularly ate alone, because no one just sat at his table…
– Pope Leo XIV emphasized that he would continue the legacy of his predecessor, synodality, that is, the idea of a church that breaks with clericalism, listens, and better involves the laity. You participated in last year’s Vatican synod on the topic, and this March, together with Cardinal Péter Erdő, you assumed the general patronage of the conference entitled Synodality in Hungarian. You were obviously pleased to hear the new pope’s commitment to his heart’s desire.
– Yes, but I must add that it is not so easy to achieve this in our country, because many believers are used to priests doing everything for them. The feudal concept of the church is not yet completely a thing of the past, but we are working to dismantle these habits. It is also a question of what form Pope Leo wants to continue the synodal process in exactly the way his predecessor envisioned.
– Archbishop Cirill Hortobágyi of Pannonhalma also suggested that synodality can only take root if it is embodied in church regulations. That is why he said it was encouraging that the new pope also has a degree in canon law.
– It has been stated before that Pope Francis did not order a legal framework for the implementation of synodality. In this context, questions also arise about how papal primacy, episcopal collegiality, i.e. independence, and the greater role given to the faithful relate to each other? The synodal process launched in recent years is a continuation of the Second Vatican Council and carries with it the development of Catholic doctrine. Because the Church is not a museum, but a community that is constantly changing even in its teachings. For example: we have always professed that life must be protected, yet it was Pope Francis who rewrote the catechism, stating that the death penalty is incompatible with the Gospel.
– I find that while many celebrate Leo XIV as a successor to Francis, more traditional believers also see him as their Pope. Can the new head of the church build bridges between progressive and conservative Catholics?
- This is a long-term challenge, but the signs so far are encouraging. I also think it is important that the Pope should take back the role of the Church in the public discourse on religion. We must not allow politicians to tell us who is a true Christian and who is not, even if some of them portray themselves as the Pope in an image created by artificial intelligence. In this respect, the situation in America is now even worse than in Europe. In this respect, it is not a bad thing that Robert Francis Prevost was born in the United States, so he has local knowledge and authority among his fellow citizens.
For him, building bridges is not a posture he adopts, it is a basic personality trait.
As I got to know him earlier, he did not start talking about it as a pope, but has always been a proponent of reconciliation. He also has a certain American desirability - his nickname 'Yankee Latino' was not in vain among his fellow Augustinians, a reference to his North and South American origins.
.jpeg)
Comments