The Agenda with Steve Paikin (Audio) - What's Next for the Catholic Church?

Episode Date: March 5, 2025

Pope Francis papacy is considered the most progressive to date. But as he fights an extended illness, the process for electing a new pope has likely already begun. What mark has the current pope made on the more than one billion Catholics around the world, what's involved in choosing his successor, and in what direction might a new pope lead the Catholic Church? For insight, we welcome: Michael W. Higgins, author of "The Jesuit Disruptor: A Personal Portrait of Pope Francis," and Emma Anderson, University of Ottawa professor in the Department of Classics and Religious Studies.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Renew your 2.0 TVO with more thought-provoking documentaries, insightful current affairs coverage, and fun programs and learning experiences for kids. Regular contributions from people like you help us make a difference in the lives of Ontarians of all ages. Visit tvo.me slash 2025 donate to renew your support or make a first-time donation and continue to discover your 2.0 TVO. The papacy of Pope Francis is considered by many to be the most progressive in the Catholic Church's history. But as he fights an extended illness, the process for electing a new pope has likely already begun. What mark has the current pope made on the more than one billion Catholics around the world?

What's involved in choosing his successor? And in what direction might a new pope lead the Catholic Church? Let's ask. In the nation's capital, Emma Anderson. She's professor in the Department of Classics and Religious Studies at the University of Ottawa. And with us here in studio, Michael

W. Higgins, author of The Jesuit Disruptor, a personal portrait of Pope Francis. He's also the Basilian Distinguished Fellow of Contemporary Catholic Thought at the University of St. Michael's College at U of T. And Michael, as always, great to have you here. And Emma Anderson, lovely to have you on the program as well. It's nice to be here. Thank you. Thank you, yes. Let's start with some background about the man who has been the Pope for the past 12 years.

What do we need to know about that? Well, first, a number of firsts actually, Steve. He is the first Latin American pontiff we've had. He's from Argentina, as you know. His background, his parents were Italian immigrants, but he is very much a figure of the global South, but he's a first in several other categories as well, by which I mean. He's the first member of the papacy ever to be a member of the Society of Jesus, so he's a Jesuit. He's the first actually to take the name

Francis, which he took from Francesco di Baronadone, who of course Francis of Assisi, right? And he is also the first to, in quite a while, to live outside the Apostolic Palace, which is the traditional residence of the Pope, and moved into basically an apartment complex adjacent to the, well, adjacent to the Basilica, but quite close to the Apostolic Palace, which was illustrative and remains illustrative of his commitment to simplifying the papacy in style, in appearance, and in reality. Did people find that odd?

They find it both attractive and discomforting. They find it attractive in the sense here's a pope who's committed to a radical simplicity of style. We haven't had a pope like this for a very long time. To a degree John the 23rd from 1958 to 1963 introduced many reforms into the church but he was still very much a product of the old tradition. Francis, who was never at the council, first pope we've had, who was not in any way at the council, is very much a pope of the council. And as a consequence, he's attempted to simplify the trappings of the papacy. Others find that disturbing because they love the colour and the splendour

and the panoply and the epic nature of the papacy convinced that it's been inalterable over the centuries since the time of Jesus. But that of course is entirely ahistorical. What we have now is much more a product of the Renaissance than it is of the early church. So he's a man who's brought a refreshing and radical simplicity to the office of Peter. Let me follow up with you on that, Emma Anderson, which is to say the notion that he's the first Jesuit, the first non-European to become Pope. Did all of that, in some respects I'm asking you to sum up the views of more than a billion

Catholics here, but how intriguing or neat do you think Catholics found those two aspects of his background? Well, I still remember when he was first introduced back in 2013, and he came up onto the balcony, and he was dressed, of course, all in white, but he didn't have a really bejeweled pectoral cross, and he simply said, Buona sera, good evening. And his glasses reminded me of those of my father, very simple, maybe cheap even. He wasn't wearing any of the red regalia. And he quickly moved past the part where normally the pope blesses and prays for the crowd, opting instead to have the crowd bless and pray for him, which I think right away sort of sent the signal that this was going to be a different kind of Pope. That and his title, Pope Francis, not

Pope Francis the first, but just Pope Francis, bringing to mind of course not just one but two heroes, the first being Francis of Assisi, as Michael mentioned, with those associated ethics that surround Saint Francis, concern for the environment, nature, and also for the poor. And Pope Francis has done a wonderful job of linking those two together, really making a strong argument that our sins, collective sins against the environment and nature, also end up hurting the most vulnerable people in the world as well. And in terms of what makes him very different or distinctive from his predecessors, Michael gave us a bit of a list. What would you add to the list?

I would say the emphasis on simplicity definitely has this kind of Franciscan overtone, but to me the most remarkable thing about Pope Francis' papacy has been really almost a kind of slow redefinition of really what sin means. Sin, I think, for Pope Francis is something that is more structural, institutional, and human rather than Catholic particularly. If we look at the evolution of the papacy and their sort of personal hobby horses of John the 23rd, Paul the 6th, then moving into John Paul one, two, and then Benedict, we can see that for most of those after John the 23rd, there was an emphasis really on the definition of individual sexual sins like homosexuality, like abortion, like artificial birth control, those sorts of things. Whereas with Pope Francis, we really got a radical break with that.

He is asking and holding a mirror up, not just to Catholics, but to all of humanity, what are you doing to make the world worse and what could you do to make the world better? And again, this emphasis on the environment and how all of us are causing destruction. All of us are complicit in the destruction of the planet. All of us are turning our back on our most vulnerable brothers and sisters. These are messages that are new and different, really, since the time of Pope John XXIII.

OK, Michael, let me pick up on that with you. If a pope is fortunate, he is remembered for a particular string of reforms or something. What's on the list for this pope in terms of notable reforms that you think he'll be remembered for forever? I think there are a number of them actually, Steve, and the most important is the notion of synodality. This is a concept that he actually drew from in terms of Eastern Orthodoxy, the Church of England,

and other bodies that have had various forms of synod governance. But he took the term and he applied it differently in the context of the Catholic history of synods. Now, without getting too technical about this, what it means in effect is he has created a culture of deep listening, reverencing the other, punctuating our arguments and polemics with moments of blessed and curative silence rather than screaming at each other. Now he wanted to model that way, sometimes called conversations in the spirit, by institutionalizing it.

And so he had two sessions on synodality itself. This seems, you know, for some an archaic thing, maybe an amusement for the Pope, really of no long-term structural potential change, but it is. He's changing the face of the Church, how to be Church, how to be a member of the Church, how to speak freely and to listen attentively. That kind of reform, changing the culture of being a Catholic, is an enormous part of the Bergoglio legacy, continues to be part of that. Bergoglio is his real name.

That's right. Bergoglio, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, that Francis, Papa Bergoglio. But the other reforms he's made are no less significant in some ways, though less perhaps dramatic. One is his very significant increase of the number of women in positions of prominence within Vatican governance. Now this is quite separate from the much more contemplated question of women in sacramental ministry, but it does speak to his determination to engage women at levels of operation within the Vatican structure itself,

which are indeed unprecedented. Also, Emma is quite right, his notion of sin is much more expansive, less legalistic. He in fact, more than any pope that I know of, continues to identify himself as a sinner. He will identify himself as a sinner. And he doesn't mean this in a kind of a tele-evangelistic way. He means it in the kind of way that Emma outlined. And so what you have with Francis is not only an engine of reform driving many things at the same time. You begin to realize as you look at the history of his accomplishments that they are substantive but they are also primarily changes of style. He's not

overturned any doctrine. He's not overturned any doctrine. He's not introduced any new doctrine. What he has done is to soften the Church's morality. It's laws. I mean, we like to think of him, or I like to think of him in terms of the caress of mercy. He's the pope of mercy. This was his key idea when he became pope.

But he's also the pope who identifies in solidarity with the marginalized. Where did he go, Steve, when he first became Pope? Not to Argentina. In fact, he's never gone back to Argentina. Unlike other Popes who have returned to their native lands, what he did is he flew to Lampedusa and he stood with the migrants who had fled North Africa, some of course who perished on the seas, and he stood with them on that island in south of Italy.

That it seems to me was a dramatic first instance of the kind of pontificate we were going to get and it's been replicated many times. He has had Emma a dramatic and historic connection to Canada in as much as nearly three years ago he went to Alberta to deliver an apology to residential school victims there. We're going to show a brief clip of that and then I'm going to come back and get your take on that. Sheldon, if you would. Today I am here in this land that, along with its ancient memories, preserves the scars of still open wounds. I am here because the first step of my penitential pilgrimage among you

is that of again asking forgiveness, of telling you once more that I am deeply sorry. Emma, what was the significance of those words to that church? Well, it was historic. And this is something that Canadians, particularly Indigenous Canadians, have been waiting for for a very long time. Throughout much of Francis' papacy, it didn't look like it was going to happen. And then in 2022, the Pope came. And he came despite mobility issues that had him largely in a wheelchair for most of his visit. And he linked his visit with what I thought was quite a good idea, really under the aegis of Saint Anne, the grandmother of Jesus,

a saint who has often been one of the most popular in indigenous Catholic circles. Because of her, the fact that she's an elder, Because of the fact that she's an elder, because of the fact that she's a grandmother, she's a relatable and healing figure. And she also speaks to that need for healing of extended Indigenous families and intergenerational trauma from residential schools. His apologies were fulsome.

They seemed heartfelt. they were repeated, and in each of the places that he visited, he linked this kind of message of really seeking forgiveness from Indigenous people for the historical wrongs, including the arrogance of thinking that the Catholic Church could or should try to change the culture, language, and particularly the spirituality of Canada's Indigenous people. Not just since the 19th century, but all the way back to the very beginnings of the Canadian conversation with the founding of Quebec in 1608. Almost right away, we had tentatives of conversion,

including targeting of indigenous children for such efforts. That he did it, Michael, and the way he did it, could any other pope have matched that? I don't think so, although John Paul II came to Canada, as you know, twice. And in the second case very specifically to go to Fort Simpson to meet with the indigenous peoples. And to his great credit John Paul II had a long history of involvement with indigenous peoples throughout the Americas, particularly Guatemala but other places as well. But Francis took us a step further, because of course with John Paul II, there was no exposure or disclosure, if you like, of the infamy of residential schools.

So that wasn't on 1984, 1984, 1985, 1986. Somewhere in the mid-80s, the first time he came was 1984, and then I think it was two years later he came back. So... Our understanding of all of that was very different. That's right. 40 plus years ago. Exactly, exactly. Whereas Francis has a tremendous capacity for empathy and I think that this is what our

indigenous leaders discovered when they when they went to Rome representing the Metis and the Enuit and First Nations. They were much moved by his capacity for empathy to enter into their pain. He listened to them. And you saw that on the pilgrimage, penitential pilgrimage, he called it, to Canada, where he actually attended. He listened.

He didn't exhort, he didn't engage in papal rhetoric, he didn't remonstrate. He simply listened to them. And he listened to them with that kind of reverence that I was talking about earlier, which he's tried to embed in the way that people in the church talk to each other, and indeed to the world. Foreign affairs. John Paul II is perhaps best known as the Pope

who had the most significant influence on foreign affairs in the world, but this Pope has weighed in as well. Ukraine. Here's what he had to say about ending the war. Sheldon, a clip if you would. Well, I guess America's not going to be that mediator right now. That was an interview incidentally from last year. And then just two days ago from the hospital he posted this.

He said, I pray for you too. I pray above all for peace. From here, war appears even more absurd. Let us pray for martyred Ukraine, Palestine, Israel, Lebanon, Myanmar, Sudan, and Kivu. Okay, let's get into this now. Emma, why do you think it was important for him to weigh in on the multiple crises and upheavals that are happening in foreign affairs today? I think this speaks to the fact that this is a different kind of pope and that he puts his pastoral priorities first. You were just talking, Michael, so well about the pope's capacity for compassion

and empathy. And I think we really see this in his advocacy for those suffering, suffering under tyranny, suffering under war, suffering under poverty, suffering under exclusion. And I also think that the Pope is best when he speaks from his heart and often speaks off the cuff and often then has people have to try to walk back what he's saying. Some of the most famous comments of his papacy were made in the air when he was talking to reporters flying from one place to the other, perhaps one of the most famous comments of his entire 12 years was, who am I to judge on the issue of kind, open-hearted homosexuals? He's like, who am I to judge that there are any better or worse Catholics than I am myself? So once again, we get this kind of sense of wanting to be with, advocate

for, and have a solidarity with those who were in the worst, the worst places. Just like Michael was saying, one of the first trips he made was to stand side by side with migrants who had barely survived their hellish ordeal in flight from places war-torn, with no economic opportunities, seeking a better life. And I think that's what he's trying to do, as he daily, even from his hospital bed, communicates with parish priests in Gaza, for example. Michael, where would you put his impact on world affairs, say, compared to John Paul II? Well, you were right to say that John Paul II was very politically oriented. He was, and he didn't apologize for it, and his initiatives were often epic and sometimes quite revolutionary.

With Francis, I think they're both more sustained, less dramatic and persistent. We've had an instance recently at the beginning of the Jubilee year where along with Cardinal O'Malley of the recently retired Archbishop of Boston, he worked to have released 536 Cuban prisoners. And he's done this several times before with Barack Obama. He negotiated a new relationship between the United States and Cuba, as you know, which has been hostile for decades. He's also been involved in other discussions in other parts of the world. You've got to remember the Vatican is a very complex institution with representation at some 180 countries.

It has nunchichors or papal embassies in all these countries. He can also access international religious organisations, religious orders and whatnot, provide information to help him function with his Secretary of State Cardinal Petaline and his Secretary for Relations with with states Paul Gallaher. He's able to negotiate in ways that aren't so easy for standard sovereignty. I'll end by saying this

It does seem to me that in a time in which governments are becoming increasingly and determinately self-isolationist, where the old order of multilateralism is beginning to crumble, when we have a new and threatening narcissism among nations, the role of the papacy as a mediating power has never been greater. And as you saw with the quotation with regard to Ukraine, but also his daily phone calls to a parish that's presaged in Gaza. He doesn't go a night, with the exception of his illness right now, without phoning them.

His involvement with other areas and jurisdictions under great international stress. He's always attempted to find ways of mediating. So he's dispatched ambassadors, Vatican delegates and whatnot when he can't go himself. It's not without controversy. He's got himself into some difficulty with the Ukrainian community, the diaspora, that feel that his emphasis on negotiation is establishing a kind of moral equivalence between the two powers, which in fact doesn't obtain. And of course, his commitment to a new negotiation,

or concordat, or renewal with Beijing has created a lot of anxiety amongst diaspora Catholics in Hong Kong or abroad who feel that he doesn't really read the Beijing government right. But it's his commitment to dialogue, Steve, that's important. He talks about this in an earlier work called Fratelli tutti. He talks about the importance of dialogue and negotiation with all. That's his long commitment.

Maybe he's an idealist, maybe he's a romantic, but he's committed to dialogue and negotiation as the only way out of complex situations. Emma, let me ask you about his next move, and admittedly this is going to be calling upon you to speculate, but his predecessor, Benedict XVI, got old and sick and decided to resign when he felt he couldn't do the job anymore. Do you think Francis is considering that option right now?

Well, it's certainly possible. I mean, there's really three ways forward. The first, and I think it's the one that, of course, everyone's hoping for, is that Pope Francis gets better, puts this incident in the rearview mirror, and goes on to have another couple very successful years in the papacy. Obviously, that would be the preferred option, but it seems increasingly unrealistic. He's been in the hospital since Valentine's Day. He keeps having unfortunately these terrible respiratory attacks. He's in a serious health crisis. So the other two options are the sadder ones. He either steps down possibly or he passes away from this.

However, what I find intriguing is that whether it's one or the other of these last two options, both of them really revolve around this beautiful church, this imposing huge church in fact in Rome, Santa Maria Maggiore, where the Pope has said he would like to be buried once he dies, or should he resign, he would like to live there and be a simple parish priest, hearing people's confessions and giving communions.

So in some ways, we can sort of say that we know the next chapter, whether it's that of a living Pope Emeritus, much like we had with Benedict, perhaps not with wearing the white raiment and not really retiring, but simply going back to how he started, which is as a man of the people, fundamentally as a pastor, working directly with individual Catholics on a pastoral capacity. However, either one of those, his death or his resignation, would prompt the beginning of the would prompt the beginning of the wheels turning of the next conclave and the next series of secret votes in the Sistine Chapel and all the drama and intrigue

that that calls for. Well, since we are only a couple of days removed from the Academy Awards, and since I suspect both of you have seen the movie Conclave, let's follow up with that. How accurately did they get it in the movie, Michael, and therefore is that what we're about to see in relatively short order? It was surprisingly accurate, actually. There were only a couple of things

that seemed to be out of sync. I mean, the ending is quite improbable, of course. And there were a couple of things. Don't give it away. I'm not gonna give it away. And a couple of other things. It's a great movie. It's highly dramatic.

But in terms of process and the role of particular personalities, it was accurate. When the Pope dies and before another Pope is elected, the seat is empty, the seti vacanti, the seat of Peter is empty. And this is sometimes called the interregni, the seat of Peter is empty, and this is sometimes called the interregnum, between the two reigns, right? And so that's the exciting period that conclave is all about, because we open with the death

of the previous pope. Should we put this picture up, Sheldon? Go ahead, let's show everybody. This is the conclave of cardinals as they gathered in the Sistine Chapel to choose a new pope when John Paul II died in 2005. And my goodness, that could be a scene right out of the movie. I mean, the movie really nailed it. It did on several fronts.

And the use of two principal figures that emerged during the interregnum, the use to which they are put in the film is accurate. One is the Cardinal Chamberlain or Camalengo whose basic duty is to ascertain whether the Pope is dead and then to begin the process of the obsequies or funeral rites and whatever. And then the Dean of the College of Cardinals played by Ray Fiennes in the film whose job is to bring all the Cardinals together, the Cardinal electors, not all of Cardinals.

All the Cardinals come to Rome but only those under the age of 80 actually vote. So the Cardinal electors are gathered in the Sistine Chapel and the speech that Ralph Fiennes, Ray Fiennes, of course, is really a classic example of a Francis speech. The jostling faith with doubt and that kind of thing. It's a wonderful dynamic and it's a strong feature of Francis's own spirituality. There are many aspects of the film that ring true and my sense is we'll see this lived out again, maybe not imminently, but certainly I would suspect within a relatively short time. Francis is old, he's had several medical issues.

He's 88 now? He's 88. That's the longest living pontiff we've had. He's 88. Benedict died in his early 90s, but he had resigned, of course. But my sense is that every one of these instances of serious medical impairment further weakens him, further weakens his system. And this clearly has been the most threatening that we've faced. So without being macabre or lugubrious, my sense is that I would be very surprised if we still have Pope Francis by the end of 2025.

Emma, do, and again admittedly we're in the realm of speculation here, but what do we know about the direction in which the majority of cardinals may be leaning in terms of how doctrinaire, how liberal, etc., they want the next pope to be. Well, the wonderful thing about this is we can do a kind of a statistical analysis. So we've got 253 cardinals in the College of Cardinals, but not all of them are voting members. Only 140 are going to be able to cast their ballots. And just like Michael was saying, you have to be under the age of 80 to be able to cast a ballot. So some of our Canadian delegation, because we have five cardinals, will be able to participate,

and some have recently aged out. So Cardinal Marc Wielet, who was thought of as a possible pope, or a papavilli, during the last two conclaves in 2005 and 2013, he will not be able to vote, although he probably will be participating behind the scenes. But others will. Thomas Collins, he's only 78. He'll be participating. As will Michael Cernze. He was made a Cardinal in 2019. We also have a brand new Cardinal in Frank Leo of Toronto, who was only made a Cardinal several months ago in December of 2024. And we have Gerald Lacroix, who's the youngest, aside from Leo, who's only 53.

Lacroix is 67. So everyone except for Marc Wielat will be able to vote in this conclave of the Canadian Cardinals. So then when we back up and say, of that 140, Pope Francis put in place 111 of this 140, we get a kind of a sense perhaps of where this conclave could go. But even with that there is still room for doubt. Just because you were nominated or put in place by Francis does not necessarily mean that you're going to

share all of his priorities and all of his spiritual ethos. Nevertheless, it does give him something of a leg up, I would say, in ensuring that his legacy continues in a more liberal direction. And Michael, is it 50% plus one? Is that how you become the Pope? No, no, it's back to two-thirds. Two-thirds. There have been several changes, and several changes even in the composition of the college. There was one time where the ceiling for the number of Cardinals was 70, and now it's technically 120.

But in fact, the Popes exceeded all the time. Every country's going to play this game, and the bookmakers are already working in London, making decisions about who's going to get this or whatnot. And there are some names that have already surfaced, Cardinal Taglia, formerly of Manila, but in the Vatican structure for quite a number of years, obviously a Filipino, and the other one, Pietro Panellin, I referred to earlier, Secretary of State. But there is an note adage. Emma would know this. And I think you do as well, that a cardinal that enters a conclave, a pope, exits a cardinal.

So the thing they most do is to dampen or tamper or damp down any speculation that they're seeking the position. Well, if I had a vote, I'd give it to Ralph Fiennes. He was amazing in the movie. And he is Catholic. Yeah. Emma Anderson, I had a vote, I'd give it to Ray Fiennes. He was amazing in the movie. But he's Catholic. Yeah. Emma Anderson, Michael Higgins, thanks so much for this absolutely fascinating

conversation about what's next for the Catholic Church. Thanks to you both. Thank you very much. Pleasure. Thank you. Thank you.