Next Pope After Benedict...

[Frodo]

Pope Benedict XVI doesn't look as if he will survive as long as his predecessor did, which brings me to my question(s) and the reason why I started this thread:

Whom do you see as being most likely to succeed him, and will that person most likely be a cardinal from the 'Global South'? 

Also, how much of an impact will such a successor (in all likelihood to be more conservative than either John Paul or Benedict) have on the Church, particularly here in the United States?

[titaniumtux]

Well, I'm still waiting for the Catholic Church to elect a black cardinal for papacy...but then again there would be pros and cons to that (it would make the Catholic Church look great in North Am, though it would maybe have a negative impact in Asia). The next Pope will probably follow the current trend though of being a non-Italian European (or maybe Canadian or Australian).

Pope Benedict XVI is pretty much as conservative as Pope John Paul II (let's not forget that JP II wrote "Theology of the Body"), though Benedict XVI seems to be more blunt in his statements (or at least the media would have us think so).

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Last year, in this thread: https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=74687.0, I put out some names:

Africa:
John Njue (born in 1944 from Kenya)
Wilfrid Napier (born in 1941 from South Africa)
Polycarp Pengo (born in 1944 from Tanzania)
Peter Turkson (born in 1948 from Ghana)
Gabriel Zubeir Wako of Sudan?

Latin America:
Jaime Lucas Ortega y Alamino (born in 1936 from Cuba)
Jorge Bergoglio (born in 1936 from Argentina)
Odilo Scherer (born in 1949 from Brazil)
Jorge Urosa (born in 1942) from Venezuela

Plus some others.

[Sic Semper Fascistis]

I hope that it will be a less reactionary and fundies-liking one.

[Sewer]

The next Pope is Pope Peter II.

[Psychic Octopus]

How about a pope from the USA? Africa would be nice too.

[Hans-im-Glück]

Nobody knows what in the head of the Catholic church going on . I don't expect from the USA, because many in the church think after the sex scandals they don't have the control over they own part of the Catholic church.

I don't think the next pope is less conservative. All Cardinals were nominated by John Paul II and Benedict VI. They are all very reactionary. The most probable next pope is a conservative from Europe, maybe from South America (but this would be a surprise )

[12th Doctor]

Nobody knows what in the head of the Catholic church going on . I don't expect from the USA, because many in the church think after the sex scandals they don't have the control over they own part of the Catholic church.

I don't think the next pope is less conservative. All Cardinals were nominated by John Paul II and Benedict VI. They are all very reactionary. The most probable next pope is a conservative from Europe, maybe from South America (but this would be a surprise )

A couple of things I want to clear up. 

First, with all the liberal bs on Benedict, every liberal Catholic I have talked to who has seriously studied the current Pope's record as Pope has found little to complain about.  In fact, Benedict taken on a whole has been more moderate the John Paul, who was really pretty conservative, but a better PR Pope.

Second, there is a long history of Pope's of opposite ideological persuasions pre/post-ceding one another.  Pius IX (who started out as an ultra-liberal) came after Gregory XIV who was an arch-conservatives-arch-conservative.  During the course of his reign, Pius IX became conservative during his 32 year reign (in which he appointed every member of the CoC) and he was replaced by Leo XIII, a liberal.  Leo XIII was expected to be a short reigning pope, but he lived to be 93 and sat for 25 years, after which, a CoC almost completely chosen by Leo elected Pius X, a conservative.  After Pius died Benedict XV, a liberal, was elected.  After Benedict died, the CoC chose Pius XI, a conservative.  After Pius XI died, the cardinals picked Pius XII, a liberal.  Pius XII became more conservative in the 1950's, and so the cardinals chose John XXIII, a liberal.  He died quickly, and the cardinals picked Paul VI, who is remembered today as having been a liberal, and he was certainlt progressive, but he was more theologically orthodox by a mile than was John XXIII, and many of the bishops and Cardinals.

Benedict was ultimately picked because there was no one else that had a record that could even come close to his.  The Cardinals had not had so obvious a choice since Pius XII.  So the next pope, whoever it is, will likely be picked after a comparatively long conclave and be someone totally unexpected.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Just please, please, not a Pole again...

[12th Doctor]

Just please, please, not a Pole again...

... why?

[Lunar]

It'd certainly be far more interesting to outsiders if they went with a non-European

[Tetro Kornbluth]

Gregory XVI btw Soult. [/pedant]

Alot will depend on the political situation at the time imo. Don't rule out another European or even an Italian again.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Urban IX would be a good choice.

[Хahar 🤔]

Lando II

[12th Doctor]

http://www.popes-and-papacy.com/popes_and_the_papacy/2008/12/next-pope-my-papabili-list-for-2009.html

Not that this is authoritative, but here is one list.

As I said on a thread long ago, though, Schönborn has no chance now.  I don't know why anyone would place him on a list.  He should be ejected from the College.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

http://www.popes-and-papacy.com/popes_and_the_papacy/2008/12/next-pope-my-papabili-list-for-2009.html

Napier would be an excellent choice, I think.

[12th Doctor]

http://www.popes-and-papacy.com/popes_and_the_papacy/2008/12/next-pope-my-papabili-list-for-2009.html

Napier would be an excellent choice, I think.

Having just looked at his bio, he has a major strike against him.  He is Franciscan.  Nothing against that particular group, but there is a strong bias against "ordered" men.

[12th Doctor]

My guy, Archbishop Wuerl seems to be out of consideration.  There have been two consistories since his appointment as Archbishop of Washington D.C. and he has not been given the red hat.  That is highly unusual for that position.  He must be in the dog house, for some reason.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

there is a strong bias against "ordered" men.

Why is that?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

My guy, Archbishop Wuerl seems to be out of consideration.  There have been two consistories since his appointment as Archbishop of Washington D.C. and he has not been given the red hat.  That is highly unusual for that position.  He must be in the dog house, for some reason.

Only one consistory.  The 2006 consistory was before his appointment as Archbishop was confirmed.  The 2007 consistory was barely more than a year after becoming Archbishop,  While his predecessor, McCarrick, was named Cardinal shortly after becoming Archbishop of Washington, McCarrick spent 14 years before then as Archbishop of Newark, while Wuerl was only a bishop, albeit Bishop of Pittsburgh.  Hickey, who preceded McCarrick, was like Wuerl in that his first Archbishopric was Washington, and he had to wait eight years for the red hat.  Besides, Archbishop-Emeritus McCarrick is still a cardinal-elector.  Unless he dies sooner, I can't see Wuerl getting the red hat until McCarrick turns 80 in 2010.

[12th Doctor]

My guy, Archbishop Wuerl seems to be out of consideration.  There have been two consistories since his appointment as Archbishop of Washington D.C. and he has not been given the red hat.  That is highly unusual for that position.  He must be in the dog house, for some reason.

Only one consistory.  The 2006 consistory was before his appointment as Archbishop was confirmed.  The 2007 consistory was barely more than a year after becoming Archbishop,  While his predecessor, McCarrick, was named Cardinal shortly after becoming Archbishop of Washington, McCarrick spent 14 years before then as Archbishop of Newark, while Wuerl was only a bishop, albeit Bishop of Pittsburgh.  Hickey, who preceded McCarrick, was like Wuerl in that his first Archbishopric was Washington, and he had to wait eight years for the red hat.  Besides, Archbishop-Emeritus McCarrick is still a cardinal-elector.  Unless he dies sooner, I can't see Wuerl getting the red hat until McCarrick turns 80 in 2010.

I suppose you are correct.  But I know for a fact that he is in the dog house for having brazenly and directly contradicted Summorum Pontificum.

[12th Doctor]

there is a strong bias against "ordered" men.

Why is that?

The short answer, since that is all I have time for right now, as petty as it sounds, non-ordered priests don't like it, because they think it will result in a Pope retaining his obedience to an order, and members of other orders generally don't like it because they fear it will result in heavy favoritism.

Many Popes before the past four centuries were members of an order, but I don't think there has been once since then.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I hope that it will be a less reactionary and fundies-liking one.

Contrary to popular belief, John Paul II was not more liberal in any degree than Benedict

[Hans-im-Glück]

I hope that it will be a less reactionary and fundies-liking one.

Contrary to popular belief, John Paul II was not more liberal in any degree than Benedict

That's correct.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Ask, J.J., I'm sure he's busy riggin the election now.