Does the secret of voting in the conclave last forever?

The word conclave comes from Latin cum claveliterally “with a key”, which reflects the image of the electoral cardinals locked in the Sistine Chapel until the new Pope is choosing.

A hermetic armor that began in 1271, when Pope Gregory X, after a conclave that lasted almost three years after the death of Clemente IV – and marked by external political interference – approved the Apostolic Constitution Where the risk which imposed total isolation for the cardinals, in addition to the requirement to make continuous voting.

The legislative document prohibited the cardinals from receiving messages, visits or any form of communication with the outside. It also included pressure measures such as that if after three days they had not chosen Pope, they were limited to food: first, the most elaborate dishes were eliminated, then even the wine.

The importance of the secret became even more crucial in the modern era. During the 1903 conclave, Emperor Francisco José de Austria covered himself in the the right of the exclusive, The right to the veto from which some European Catholic monarchies enjoyed, such as Austria, Spain and France, to invalidate the candidacy of the Italian cardinal Mariano Rampolla, through a representative in the Sistine Chapel.

Although the veto did not prevent Rampolla from being won several supports, it greatly influenced the final choice.

As soon as you sit on the throne of Pedro, the newly chosen Pope Pius X immediately abolished that veto to shield the conclave in front of all secular interference. The Where the risk It was modified and finally suspended, but its spirit remains in force in subsequent documents, as in the Constitution The universe dominic of the flock of San Juan Pablo II (1996), which governs the current procedure of modern conclaves.

The Magna Carta, which was amended by Benedict XVI before its resignation to the papacy in 2013, imposes that the violation of the conclave secrecy is punishable by automatic excommunication automaticone of the most severe sanctions contemplated by canon law.

The secret ends breaking

However, the recent history of the Catholic Church shows that this reserve ends up breaking sooner or later. The 2013 conclave, in which Pope Francis was chosen, is a clear example of how, despite the strict secret, details about the voting rounds and the candidates with more support were leaked.

Despite the reserve required by the process, journalist Gerard O’Connell rebuilt in the book The choice of Pope Francis How Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio received 45 votes in the second round of voting, a figure that amounted to 85 in the fifth, thus exceeding the majority of two thirds required.

He also revealed, citing internal sources, which also sounded strongly in the first votes the candidacies of Cardinal Italian Angelo Scola; of the prefect of the Dicasterio for the bishops and president of the Pontifical Commission for Latin America, Cardinal Marc Ouellet; or that of the president of the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors, Cardinal Sean O’Malley.

Even Pope Francis himself has shared anecdotes of the conclave that chose him, as the suggestion made by Brazilian cardinal Claudio Hummes of adopting the name of Francisco, in tribute to the Holy of Assisi.

In 2024, journalist Javier Martínez Brocal published the book The successor, in which the late Pontiff, the only one with the power to reveal information from the conclave without violating the secret, brought to light other details, even from the 2005 conclave in the was chosen Benedict XVI.

Attempts to block the choice of Benedict XVI in 2005

Specifically, Pope Francis uncovered that in the 2005 conclave, after the death of San Juan Pablo II, the cardinal electors used their name to “block the Ratzinger election and then negotiate a third different candidate”.

“It happened that I got to have forty of the one hundred and fifteen votes in the Sistine Chapel. They were enough to stop the candidacy of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, because, if they had continued to vote for me, he could not have achieved the two thirds necessary to be elected Pope,” he said in the book of the Spanish journalist.

Pope Francis, the only one licensed to tell what is cooked in the conclave, said without ambiguity: “They used me.”

After making this maneuver public, he made it clear that when he voted “the idea of ​​those who were behind the votes” was not that Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio was chosen. “It was a full -fledged maneuver. The idea was to block the choice of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. They used me, but behind they were already thinking of proposing another cardinal. They still did not agree on who, but they were already about to launch a name,” he said in the book.

In any case, this phenomenon of airing the details of the conclave is not new. In 2005, after the election of Benedict XVI, journalist Lucio Brunelli published in the magazine Limes A detailed conclave story based on the notes that a cardinal had taken. Although they were secondary elements, they revealed that the wall of silence can sometimes crack.

According to the Constitution All Dominic of the flock, The secret about the dynamics of the conclave also extends to the non -elector cardinals, who this week have participated in the general congregations, the meetings prior to the conclave.

This obligation, in Latin severely burdened by their awareness That is, it falls on the awareness of those involved, underlines the deep moral responsibility of maintaining the secret even after the election has occurred, unless the Papa himself grants a special dispensation.

However, Camarlengo, Cardinal Kevin Farrell, is in charge of leaving written record of the result of the final scrutiny, which also allows a controlled historical documentation of the process.