Based on what?

Funny bit about Bradlee -- I hadn't heard that.

In terms of the "death watch," most media folks would agree with you and feel very strange about pre-producing pieces. However, the public and the critics expect it, without realizing it.

Look at all the good stuff they had ready at Reagan's passing. The viewers (and critics) are used to that and would be very critical if it weren't there.

Based on the massive increase in Cardinals from those areas during the reign of Pope John Paul II, truely reflecting the geographical and racial/ethnic diversity found within the Roman Catholic Church.

I spoke with one of our brothers, who recently left the Priesthood, about this. He said that absolutely no one outside the College of Cardinals has any idea what will happen. I asked him if it was possible to apply political science to get an idea of what will happen, and he said that the College is completely secret, and no one has any idea.

He is concerned that Pope John Paul II has been in power for so long, that the College is completely loaded with conservatives. Therefore, the next Pope may also be conservative. He believes that whoever is the next Pope may not bring the reform that many believe is needed in the Catholic Church.

Within Italy, there is a term that always crops up everytime there is a new Pope to elect: papabile, or 'he who has the makings of a Pope.' Those cardinals that are considered papabile are usually very senior men in the Curia (the Vatican government), but there are always longshots; Cardinal Wojtyla wasn't in anyone's sights as a papabile until he was elected. So much so, that incredulous Italians in St. Peter's Square, upon hearing his given name for the first time, questioned Un polacco? (A Pole?)

The vote in the College of Cardinals is strictly secret; violators run the risk of losing their cardinalate for unlawfully divulging privileged information during the Conclave.

No one will know the identity of the next Pope until the Sacred Conclave elects him, the white smoke comes out of the chimney of the Sistine Chapel and the Cardinal Camerlengo (chamberlain) announces (in Latin) "Joyous tidings... we have a Pope!"

If history gives us any guidelines, the next Pope will be Italian.

Nationality of Popes

Of the 264 popes (262 to be exact because Pope Benedict IX, during the dreadful medieval fights between popes and anti-popes, was elected three times) 205 were Italians, (of whom 106 were Romans), and 57 foreigners; comprised of 19 Frenchmen, 14 Greeks, 8 Syrians, 5 Germans, 3 Africans, 2 Spaniards, 1 Austrian, 1 Palestinian, 1 Englishman, 1 Dutchman, and 1 Pole.

I recall that the Italians were somewhat shocked at the election of John Paul II and speculation several years into his reign was that nobody but an Italian would follow him.

That may not be true, but the Itialians have -- maybe had -- a huge majority in the College of Cardinals and could swing a lot of power. I'm sure that's been somewhat diluted by John Paul II.

Here is a question:

Now we all know it will most likely be an italian or some foreign cardinal......has there ever been any nominations among cardinals for an american cardinal to be elected pope in the life of the catholic church or has it soley been a pretty much defined europeon role?

Of course they are fiction. Nobody is saying otherwise -- although there have been huge amounts of politics, intrigue and even alleged murder in Papal history -- nobody is saying anything like that is happening today. However, Mr. Brown did a huge amount of research for the book and the descriptions of the process and elections are allegedly pretty accurate. I remember as I read the book how familiar the accounts of the actual election were according to news reports of past Papal elections. There have been five Popes and four elections during my lifetime -- each one reported on in the media.

At least they follow closely the descriptions given our TV crews (see earlier post) by Cardinal Dearden and other coverage of past Papal Elections.

Actually, I remember back in 1978, there was a fair amount of speculation involving foul play in the death of John Paul -- who died after only about a month in office. Nothing was ever proven, and it was probably just that -- speculation.

But I'm certainly not besmirching the Church or the office of the Pope. So please relax -- there is no disrespect here.

Sorry for two posts in a row, but the above was probably posted while I wrote my last.

Each time there has been a Papal election in my memory, media in cities who have Cardinals as Archbishop speculates about the chance of their Cardinal being elected. The truth, however, seems to be that the office has been overwhelmingly European.

Of the US born Cardinals, Francis Cardinal Stafford, former Archbishop of Denver, has been very close to John Paul II, was instrumental in bringing World Youth Day to the US and was then taken to the Vatican to work closely with the Pope. But, outside the Vatican, hardly anyone knows of him.

As a dumb question, wouldn't it seem strange to pick the next Pope from a country where the church has challanged the Vatican and is presently rocked by scandal?

That's an honest question, not an accusation of any type.

I'm not sure that massive reform is needed. It seems like the particular problem you are alluding to has been addressed.

JPII was and still is a great leader for the Church. Maybe a bit on the conservative side for us Americans. I really doubt though that we have any significant changes in the church with his succesor. But who knows? We could get a nother Pope John XXIII. He was a "comprimise" pope. He was elected at an old age and the college thought that he wouldn't have the time or energy to reform the Church.

Well... we've all heard about Vatican II. :D

This ain't the Republicans vs. the Democrats where no matter who we elect, basically, we'll end up with a predictable (and very similar) product. This is a secret and totally unpredictable process that in recent years has always turned out great leaders for the Church.

For now though, I can't help to think what an amazing job JPII has done and how much his influence on the church will be missed.

DA, I agree that there should be things ready to go as far as obits, tributes etc that are there in the studio when the time comes. That makes perfect sense. I'm talking about people openly discussing "when so and so dies", "so and so's health is failing rapidly" etc. It's just tacky and mean.

When so and so dies in this case, it will have a great impact on one of the world's largest religions.

It's not mean, it's relevant.

There's a difference between talking about the future of the church and hovering like vultures. I think the line's been crossed many times. People just need to accept that this is something humans don't control.

And I wasn't just talking about the Pope, but any public figure.

Agreed on that. People need to stop talking about "We can change this when the Pope dies". It's pretty futile anyway. There ain't no "We" in "Church".