Fat Pope, Skinny Pope
What an Italian proverb can tell us about the next head of the Catholic Church
By Sean M. Theriault
The Italians have a proverb: “After a fat pope, a skinny pope.” Such guidance can help us predict what might happen in the conclave that starts today. And while the expression may be taken literally, as with the transition in 1963 from the robust John XXIII to a slender Paul VI, it is usually more expedient to interpret it figuratively. But before we can say who might be “skinny,” we must first define what we mean by Francis being “fat.”
It is natural in any institution for decision-makers to look for a future leader to address the previous one’s perceived deficiencies. American voters are familiar with this pattern: A Democratic president is often followed by a Republican; one leader’s policies are rolled back by their successor. But while it’s true that in the United States this familiar swing runs from left to right and back again, expecting the same from the Church blinds us to other definitions of “fat” that may be more useful in considering who might succeed Francis. The Church is a far more complicated institution than a liberal-vs-conservative lens allows, and the coming transition very well may not follow this simple ideological pattern.
Most Americans view the defining characteristic of Pope Francis as his “liberalism,” from his willingness to bless those in same-sex marriages to opening the door for divorced and remarried Catholics to receive Holy Eucharist. Many observers may assume that his successor will be more politically and doctrinally conservative, and they could point to the 2013 transition from Benedict XVI to Francis himself as an example of this kind of ideological flip-flop. But this frame fundamentally misunderstands the universality of the Church.
So, before we discuss what could come next, let’s first take a look back and consider what fat-to-skinny frames work best for the last two papal transitions. In the 2005 transition from John Paul II to Benedict XVI, the cardinals responded to a pope that liked to preach the gospel to the ends of the earth by choosing a pope more interested in managing the Church’s complicated bureaucracy. In 2013, the election that elevated Pope Francis, a pope that cared deeply about Church doctrine was followed by a pope who smelled like the flock.
The question, then, is what aspect of Francis the cardinals may seek to counterbalance with their next pick. It might be his “liberalism,” but it could also be his nationality, his attitude towards Church bureaucracy, or one of many other aspects of his complex pontificate. Each of these “fats” would give us a different “skinny.”
It might be that after more than a decade under a pope from the peripheries, the cardinals will opt for a successor whose home is closer to Rome. Although the Italian cohort is as small as it has ever been, the country still supplies the greatest number of cardinals who will participate in the conclave (followed by the United States, Brazil, France, and Spain). Cardinals Zuppi and Pizzaballa would fit this definition of “skinny.”
Or, it might be that after a pope who did not have a high regard for the institutions of the Church, the cardinals might opt for one who hopes to invigorate them. Francis did not think much of the Vatican bureaucracy (either in time or esteem). In fact, he formed a group of outside advisors explicitly to go around the Vatican bureaucracy, and he frequently did things in the Vatican that were simply “not done,” such as naming a nun to be a prefect (the head of a Vatican department). Francis did them anyway. It could be that the cardinals will choose a more pragmatic and measured man to lead them. If so, I might put my money on Cardinals Erdo (Hungary), Parolin (Italy), or Ambongo (Democratic Republic of Congo).
After the official mourning period for Francis ends and before they start taking votes, the cardinals will discuss the future of the Catholic Church. My suspicion is that synodality, clericalism, and management style will figure more prominent in that discussion than same-sex marriage, abortion, and women priests.
I am currently writing a book evaluating the iconoclastic papacy of Francis. He was the first Jesuit pope, the first from the western hemisphere, and the first who chose the name Francis. Iconoclastic indeed — but then, all recent popes have been iconoclastic. Pope John XXIII called the Vatican Council, whose transformation of the Church continues to reverberate. Pope Paul VI expanded the College of Cardinals in number (roughly doubling it) and in reach (by giving 23 countries, from Benin to Bolivia, their first cardinal). Even the pontificate of John Paul I was unusual for how short it was. John Paul II travelled to 129 countries in bringing the Gospel to the furthest corners of the globe. Only the papacy of Benedict XVI wasn’t surprising — until its very last minute, when he stepped down from the role and created the vacancy for which Francis was chosen to fill. Which part of the papal mold Francis’s successor breaks depends on how he will manifest his “skinny,” but we should certainly expect there to be a meaningful break.
So, as the cardinals start voting on Francis’s successor, keep this Italian proverb in mind — but be careful in how you define a pontiff’s “fat.” The humility and empathy for which Francis was chosen was certainly on full display during his pontificate. Those characteristics came with other facets of his personality and leadership style that became a surprise to those who elected him. The pressing needs of the Church — and what characteristics the next leader must have to address them — is what the cardinals are currently discussing in the hallways of the Vatican and will soon animate their votes in the conclave. Once they reach a decision, it will be the new pope’s mission to define his “skinny.”
Sean M. Theriault is a professor of government at UT Austin and a scholar of American political institutions and congressional decision-making. He has published six books, most recently Disruption? The Senate during the Trump Era (ed, Oxford University Press, 2024), and teaches classes on the U.S. Congress, congressional elections, party polarization in the United States, and the politics of the Catholic Church.