The Next Pope

National Catholic Reporter, July 28, 1995 by Francis X. Murphy

By Peter Hebblethwaite HarperSanFrancisco, 188 pages, $18

Peter Hebblethwaite's posthumous The Next Pope is a minor masterpiece of the theological journalist's art. Delivered to its American publisher in November 1994, a scant month before his unexpected death at age 64, the modest volume should serve as the legacy of an outstanding Vaticanologist who in some 30 years of reporting on the papacy and the worldwide activities of the Catholic church, its enemies and admirers, managed to depict the past three pontiffs -- John XXIII, Paul VI and John Paul II -- in a realistic fashion not unworthy of a truly great biographer.

Hebblethwaite traces the origin of the cardinalate to the 12th century and follows the gradual growth of the conclave or elective process whereby the princes of the church selected the new bishop of Rome amid the political intrigue and ecclesial rivalries that characterized the papacy of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance.

After a vivid description of the balloting process in the Sistine Chapel, he concentrates on the elements that should enter into the election of the 265th successor of Peter.

Hebblethwaite sees the present pope's Slavic background and his concept of his destiny as an instrument of divine providence as the driving force behind his determination to restore the church to its preconciliar certainties and political solidarity. By a series of encyclicals setting out the church's obligations in the doctrinal, social and moral orders, and by installing safe, conservative bishops in major sees around the world. John Paul means to leave a legacy of absolutes, tempered by his devotion to the Mother of God and his mystical consciousness of his own need to suffer.

Hebblethwaite downgrades the Polish pontiffs reputation as a philosopher and theologian, insisting that in his doctrinal and moral disquisitions he furnishes but one side of an argument, relying on his monarchical authority in demanding conformance to papal imperatives. He deplores the favoritism shown by the pope to Opus Dei in contrast to his shabby treatment of the Jesuits, Dominicans and Franciscans. And he suspects that for all his assurance of devotion to his predecessor, John Paul actually feels that Paul VI was vacillating and almost cowardly n his failure to control the rebellion in the postconciliar church. He seems oblivious of the precedents established by Montini in his jet-set evangelical excursions; his eliminating octogenarian cardinals from conclaves; his prevention of schisms or major breakaways and his publication of Humanae Vitae.

In his prognostications for a future conclave, Hebblethwaite lists but two Italian cardinals as papabile, the Jesuit Carlo Maria Martini of Milan and Achille Silvestrini, whom he felt were not compromised by relationships with the nation's political and industrial leadership. He cites Cardinal Roger Etchegaray as the only possible French candidate, and downgrades both the Polish-born Jewish convert Cardinal Jean-Marie Lustiger of Paris and the Belgian Cardinal Godfried Danneels in favor of the two black curial cardinals, Francis J. Arinze and Bernardin Gantin.

With a slight bow to the Brazilian former curial cardinal, Lucas Moreira Neves, he mentions Los Angeles Cardinal Roger Mahony who, he maintains' arrived in that California see with two fevers -- scarlet. for the red biretta; and white for the papacy.

Deploring John Paul's preoccupation with birth control, feminism and papal authority, Hebblethwaite concludes with the observation that a conclave is a moment of freedom; a chance for the church to make a fresh start. While not speculating on the longevity of the Polish pontiff whose apocalyptic vision of the year 2000 is a constant preoccupation, the author concludes that Sacerdotalis Ordinatio sums up the weakness of this pontificate.

An act of the monarchical papacy produced without serious consultation with the whole church, it showed scant regard for ecumenical implications. Declaring that in ordaining women, the Anglican communion had done something impossible, the conclusion rested on obedience rather than persuasion. Scripturally feeble, it seemed to threaten a witch-hunt. Hebblethwaite suggests. By deciding definitively against the possibility of women priests, the document seemed oblivious of the remark of Pope Pius XI, "What a pope can do, a pope can undo."