Rampolla becomes Pope
- Thread starter Tom_B
- Start date
Though I'm not Catholic so I know little of this history, it is interesting.
There's a *great* Hughes as President TL that was posted on soc.history.what-if a number of years ago. This one would probably be a bit different, though. That one has a close election with Wilson giving his position up to Hughes a touch early becasue it is certain the U.S. will be going to war (I forget who wrote it, but those familiar surely recall it), but I don't know if Hughes would co-ioperate if Wilson has lost votes this way. There's not the guarantee that the U.S. will enter the war.
I think one thing you might get is more Democrats favoring Al Smith. He was close to the nomination in 1920, but lost out in favor of James Cox, and didn't win till 1928.
Here, Democrats would realize that Wilson's anti-Catholic sentiments cost them the White House. Wanting it back, they would try to support Smith more. I don't know if this means he'd easily be the nominee in 1920, that would depend on how positive the Pope's job is viewed in Catholic eyes, and also whether he's still alive.
If Gibbons is still alive, no way, because they'd need to satisfy the Proestants who would worry about America becoming too closely tied to the Vatican. (Remember, this was a worry in 1960 as it was in the general election, and in 1920 probably denies Smith the nomination.) If Gibbons died in the interim and was seen as doing a very good job, though, Smith might be the nominee, as they feel they can try to win Catholic voters with Smith, and that non-Catholics will not fear a connection to the Vatican too strongly - while at the same time feeling both will see an American Catholic can do a great job on the world stage. (This is not, of course, to say that the general populace won't fear it, only to say that those doing the nominating will feel it's safe.)
If Gibbons dies in the intervening 4 years, and only is seen as having done an okay job, Smith might be Cox's VP nominee to get Catholics back to the party. Which might make things interesting for FDR, who would not have been in the national spotlight, whereas in OTL Roosevelt was Cox's VP choice in 1920. OTOH, he wasn't a first ballot choice in OTL 1932, so that might stay the same.
Either way, I would imagine Hughes still wins re-election.
There's a *great* Hughes as President TL that was posted on soc.history.what-if a number of years ago. This one would probably be a bit different, though. That one has a close election with Wilson giving his position up to Hughes a touch early becasue it is certain the U.S. will be going to war (I forget who wrote it, but those familiar surely recall it), but I don't know if Hughes would co-ioperate if Wilson has lost votes this way. There's not the guarantee that the U.S. will enter the war.
I think one thing you might get is more Democrats favoring Al Smith. He was close to the nomination in 1920, but lost out in favor of James Cox, and didn't win till 1928.
Here, Democrats would realize that Wilson's anti-Catholic sentiments cost them the White House. Wanting it back, they would try to support Smith more. I don't know if this means he'd easily be the nominee in 1920, that would depend on how positive the Pope's job is viewed in Catholic eyes, and also whether he's still alive.
If Gibbons is still alive, no way, because they'd need to satisfy the Proestants who would worry about America becoming too closely tied to the Vatican. (Remember, this was a worry in 1960 as it was in the general election, and in 1920 probably denies Smith the nomination.) If Gibbons died in the interim and was seen as doing a very good job, though, Smith might be the nominee, as they feel they can try to win Catholic voters with Smith, and that non-Catholics will not fear a connection to the Vatican too strongly - while at the same time feeling both will see an American Catholic can do a great job on the world stage. (This is not, of course, to say that the general populace won't fear it, only to say that those doing the nominating will feel it's safe.)
If Gibbons dies in the intervening 4 years, and only is seen as having done an okay job, Smith might be Cox's VP nominee to get Catholics back to the party. Which might make things interesting for FDR, who would not have been in the national spotlight, whereas in OTL Roosevelt was Cox's VP choice in 1920. OTOH, he wasn't a first ballot choice in OTL 1932, so that might stay the same.
Either way, I would imagine Hughes still wins re-election.
Last edited:
DTF955Baseballfan said:
Thanks for the feedback. I have some ideas of my own about a Hughes Presidency. Actually one thing that is oft overlooked is he bacame Chief Justice and ideally once should consider that aspect as well.
Cardinal Gibbons lived to 1921 OTL. I could make an argument that job stress kills him off quicker but I haven't decided yet. However Pope Innocent will at least survive to the end of the war.
Tom
I wouldn't say that Paul VI was effective enough... you know what Mass attendance is nowadays? For more proof, it seems that most Scientologists are ex-Catholics.Shope said:I agree with the sentiment, but I wouldn't call it a complete disaster. Pope Paul managed to rein-in the cogniscenti in time to keep it from being one; if it weren't for him, we'd all be Episcopalians.
And besides, I for one can't tell the difference between a modern Catholic mass and an Episcopalian service.
President Hughes
Contrary to the portrait of him painted during the election Justice Charles Evans Hughes was not that far from Wilson re the war. People heard TR and thought his views were Hughes' views. Wilson tries to be nice to Hughes during the lamd duck period but he is Woodrow Wilson so he doesn't try too hard. He also has some problems with Roosevelt and Lodge who do not see eye to eye with him on some issues.
The United States enters the war pretty much on schedule. One big difference between Hughes and Wilson is segregation. Hughes phases out the Federal segregation of the civil service imposed by Wilson. He takes some steps towards ending segregation in the US military--however there is serious resistance to this and they are halfway steps.
Of the 2 American cardinals, John Cardinal Ireland of St. Paul (note: in OTL he was denied a red hat) is more progressive than John Cardinal Farley of New York and favored by Pope Innocent (Gibbons). Ireland also is suprisingly proRepublican for an Irishman. Despite being a Baptist President Hughes gets on surprisingly well with Pope Innocent and Cardinal Ireland. He works with the Vatican in preparing a common set of principles he hopes to base the peace upon and the Vatican gives some encouragement to a movement to end racial injustice esp. (bot not solely) in America.
Pope Inncoent in his consistories has yet to appoint another American Cardinal. Unlike Pope Clement (Rampolla) his new cardinals are overwhelmingly Italian and mostly curial. However what he is doing is advancing those in the Curia in who are either moderate or progressive and stifling the rabid AntiModernist faction which formed around the late Cardinal Sarto.
Contrary to the portrait of him painted during the election Justice Charles Evans Hughes was not that far from Wilson re the war. People heard TR and thought his views were Hughes' views. Wilson tries to be nice to Hughes during the lamd duck period but he is Woodrow Wilson so he doesn't try too hard. He also has some problems with Roosevelt and Lodge who do not see eye to eye with him on some issues.
The United States enters the war pretty much on schedule. One big difference between Hughes and Wilson is segregation. Hughes phases out the Federal segregation of the civil service imposed by Wilson. He takes some steps towards ending segregation in the US military--however there is serious resistance to this and they are halfway steps.
Of the 2 American cardinals, John Cardinal Ireland of St. Paul (note: in OTL he was denied a red hat) is more progressive than John Cardinal Farley of New York and favored by Pope Innocent (Gibbons). Ireland also is suprisingly proRepublican for an Irishman. Despite being a Baptist President Hughes gets on surprisingly well with Pope Innocent and Cardinal Ireland. He works with the Vatican in preparing a common set of principles he hopes to base the peace upon and the Vatican gives some encouragement to a movement to end racial injustice esp. (bot not solely) in America.
Pope Inncoent in his consistories has yet to appoint another American Cardinal. Unlike Pope Clement (Rampolla) his new cardinals are overwhelmingly Italian and mostly curial. However what he is doing is advancing those in the Curia in who are either moderate or progressive and stifling the rabid AntiModernist faction which formed around the late Cardinal Sarto.
Human Equality Movement
The combination of President Hughes, Pope Innocent (Gibbons) and Cardinal Ireland produce what comes to be known as the Human Equality Movement. The core aspect of this is the explicit rejection of racism though the movement has some vague epiphenomena. One effect of this is the Klan, reforming after the Franks trial (which made it antisemitic) becomes intensely antiCatholic as well esp. in regard to activist priests. One priest it will lynch will be canoinized before 2000.
With the death of Cardinal Ireland in 1918, Pope Innocent is deeply saddened and he becomes even stronger in his support of the Human Equality Movement. In 1919 he is issues the controversial Papal Bull, Omnia Humanitas which supports its principles strongly. It also includes a very negative assessment of the Bolshevik Revolution.
In the United States the bishops differ in their approach towards HEM. Some are wildly enthusiastic while others merely pay it lip service. No Bishop is foolish enough to oppose it openly. Some priests are though and 3 of them are excommunicated. One of them is Fr. Gommar Dupre of Shreveport, LA, who founds the White Catholic Traditionalist Movement in 1920. His racist opposition to the Human Equality Movement is the schwerpunkt of his movement but he also includes other issues eventually such as criticism of the minor changes Pope Clement made the liturgy in 1912.
In late 1917 another American came to the Vatican to join Pope Innocent's inner circle. This was Fr. Sigourney Fay, a convert from Anglicanism. The influence is two way. Pope Innocent actually manages to get the obese priest to lose weight.
In 1918 while the war is going on Pope Innocent issues a an encyclical called Mediator Dei which he starts by praising the Tridentine Rite but says eventually the rite should not be considered engraved in stone and minor alterations such as Clement made are warranted. He appoints a commission to study and recommend other possible changes. Fr. Fay is included on the commission.
Because the support of Catholics was so important in his election, President Hughes comes out against Prohibition which is largely unpopular with them (Cardinal Ireland was an exception). He also does not close Storyville so the emigration of jazz musicians outside New Orleans is not as rapid as OTL. He is not quite as harsh with antiwar positions as Wilson was saying that a declaration of war does not abrogate the First Amendment and reminding people he is a former Justice.
What emerges is a cozy relationship between the Baptist President and the American Pope. In early 1918 Washington and the Vatican produce a joint proposal for peace and it is this which the Germans respond to in their dark days of late 1918.
In late 1917 Cardinal Mercier of Belgium becomes somewhat disgruntled with both Pope Innocent and Cardinal della Chiesa. He feels that the plight of Belgium is being forgotten by the pope in his new concerns with both Irish independence and the HEM, and by the secretary of state who seems to be pushing peace at any price IHO. This dissatisfaction is more of a chill than a complete break but reports and rumors of it get blown of proportion in the press. For one thing it is made to seem that Cardinal Mercier has thrological problems with the Human Equality Movement where really his problems is merely a matter of priorities.
The combination of President Hughes, Pope Innocent (Gibbons) and Cardinal Ireland produce what comes to be known as the Human Equality Movement. The core aspect of this is the explicit rejection of racism though the movement has some vague epiphenomena. One effect of this is the Klan, reforming after the Franks trial (which made it antisemitic) becomes intensely antiCatholic as well esp. in regard to activist priests. One priest it will lynch will be canoinized before 2000.
With the death of Cardinal Ireland in 1918, Pope Innocent is deeply saddened and he becomes even stronger in his support of the Human Equality Movement. In 1919 he is issues the controversial Papal Bull, Omnia Humanitas which supports its principles strongly. It also includes a very negative assessment of the Bolshevik Revolution.
In the United States the bishops differ in their approach towards HEM. Some are wildly enthusiastic while others merely pay it lip service. No Bishop is foolish enough to oppose it openly. Some priests are though and 3 of them are excommunicated. One of them is Fr. Gommar Dupre of Shreveport, LA, who founds the White Catholic Traditionalist Movement in 1920. His racist opposition to the Human Equality Movement is the schwerpunkt of his movement but he also includes other issues eventually such as criticism of the minor changes Pope Clement made the liturgy in 1912.
In late 1917 another American came to the Vatican to join Pope Innocent's inner circle. This was Fr. Sigourney Fay, a convert from Anglicanism. The influence is two way. Pope Innocent actually manages to get the obese priest to lose weight.
In 1918 while the war is going on Pope Innocent issues a an encyclical called Mediator Dei which he starts by praising the Tridentine Rite but says eventually the rite should not be considered engraved in stone and minor alterations such as Clement made are warranted. He appoints a commission to study and recommend other possible changes. Fr. Fay is included on the commission.
Because the support of Catholics was so important in his election, President Hughes comes out against Prohibition which is largely unpopular with them (Cardinal Ireland was an exception). He also does not close Storyville so the emigration of jazz musicians outside New Orleans is not as rapid as OTL. He is not quite as harsh with antiwar positions as Wilson was saying that a declaration of war does not abrogate the First Amendment and reminding people he is a former Justice.
What emerges is a cozy relationship between the Baptist President and the American Pope. In early 1918 Washington and the Vatican produce a joint proposal for peace and it is this which the Germans respond to in their dark days of late 1918.
In late 1917 Cardinal Mercier of Belgium becomes somewhat disgruntled with both Pope Innocent and Cardinal della Chiesa. He feels that the plight of Belgium is being forgotten by the pope in his new concerns with both Irish independence and the HEM, and by the secretary of state who seems to be pushing peace at any price IHO. This dissatisfaction is more of a chill than a complete break but reports and rumors of it get blown of proportion in the press. For one thing it is made to seem that Cardinal Mercier has thrological problems with the Human Equality Movement where really his problems is merely a matter of priorities.
With the interest in equal rights, it would also be interesting to see if any baseball teams integrate 30 years early. I'm trying to think of who the most devoutly Catholic major league owners were. However, the Braves were long 2nd class citizens to the Red Sox, ever since the Sox entered the league. I can imagine them signing one in 1918, trying to get better attendance, with a few more trickling in. That's a heavily Catholic town, after all.
OTOH, another thought would be Cleveland - I'm pretty sure their owner was a devout Catholic, from what I recall; in fact, much of the Cleveland area was. Perhaps instead, a "Smokey Joe" Williams tips the balance of the American league pennant race in 1920.
It would take a bit longer for the number of blacks to be more than a trickle, but would Charlie Comiskey sign a few just after a few of his stars were booted out for throwing the Series? After all, such black players would be less antagonized by the really low pay Comiskey gave his players; it would still be better than what they could earn normally.
Just a thought, as you can tell by my name, I am really interested in sports what-ifs.
OTOH, another thought would be Cleveland - I'm pretty sure their owner was a devout Catholic, from what I recall; in fact, much of the Cleveland area was. Perhaps instead, a "Smokey Joe" Williams tips the balance of the American league pennant race in 1920.
It would take a bit longer for the number of blacks to be more than a trickle, but would Charlie Comiskey sign a few just after a few of his stars were booted out for throwing the Series? After all, such black players would be less antagonized by the really low pay Comiskey gave his players; it would still be better than what they could earn normally.
Just a thought, as you can tell by my name, I am really interested in sports what-ifs.
Shope said:I agree with the sentiment, but I wouldn't call it a complete disaster. Pope Paul managed to rein-in the cogniscenti in time to keep it from being one; if it weren't for him, we'd all be Episcopalians.
Pope Paul VI did not have the gusto to force the dissenting bishops and priests to get their collective act together; Paul VI did not have the will to contravene the changes made post - Vatican II (some of which he supposedly very much hated). He did not enforce his will on the whole 'Communion on the tongue and kneeling' which is what the Council maintained and what Pope Paul VI commanded - vs. 'Gee, I guess I'll just pop the Eucharist into my mouth like popcorn because we're so modern now.' He did not enforce the use of Gregorian chant, which is what he wanted for the Church, instead he let the bishops and dissenters do pretty much what they wanted. But yes, he was good in some ways. His Encyclical against contraception redeems his pontificate to a large degree.
In 1918 while the war is going on Pope Innocent issues a an encyclical called Mediator Dei which he starts by praising the Tridentine Rite but says eventually the rite should not be considered engraved in stone and minor alterations such as Clement made are warranted. He appoints a commission to study and recommend other possible changes. Fr. Fay is included on the commission.
The 'Liturgical studies' fad is still WAAAY to young for the Pope to be issuing ANY documents that say anything like: 'the Tridentine Rite should not be considered set in stone.' As I already wrote, you need to wait another thirty years or so before anyone is going to give it serious consideration. Considering the fact it's all that anyone has ever known, that would be really stupid thing to do. In fact, the whole NOVUS ORDO has been a foolish experiment that finally more and more people are realizing. And are looking for the Traditional Mass and Sacraments.
The 'Liturgical studies' fad is still WAAAY to young for the Pope to be issuing ANY documents that say anything like: 'the Tridentine Rite should not be considered set in stone.' As I already wrote, you need to wait another thirty years or so before anyone is going to give it serious consideration. Considering the fact it's all that anyone has ever known, that would be really stupid thing to do. In fact, the whole NOVUS ORDO has been a foolish experiment that finally more and more people are realizing. And are looking for the Traditional Mass and Sacraments.
I would believe a pope at that time would still be very much involved in social issues. Putting a prioriy on racism is interesting, but what about the much more pressing issue of labor and the risk of dechristianization of workers all over Europe? Also, what would the impact of the HEM on colonial doctrines and how would Entente powers look at this?
Max Sinister
Banned
Franz Josef II said:
Why was it stupid? And why are people looking for it again? What gives?
I guess if Vatican II hadn't happened, the older and more conservative folks would be more content with the church, but more and more younger would simply leave it. In other words: In the short run, they might be better of,, but not in the long run.
DTF955Baseballfan said:With the interest in equal rights, it would also be interesting to see if any baseball teams integrate 30 years early. I'm trying to think of who the most devoutly Catholic major league owners were. However, the Braves were long 2nd class citizens to the Red Sox, ever since the Sox entered the league. I can imagine them signing one in 1918, trying to get better attendance, with a few more trickling in. That's a heavily Catholic town, after all.
OTOH, another thought would be Cleveland - I'm pretty sure their owner was a devout Catholic, from what I recall; in fact, much of the Cleveland area was. Perhaps instead, a "Smokey Joe" Williams tips the balance of the American league pennant race in 1920.
It would take a bit longer for the number of blacks to be more than a trickle, but would Charlie Comiskey sign a few just after a few of his stars were booted out for throwing the Series? After all, such black players would be less antagonized by the really low pay Comiskey gave his players; it would still be better than what they could earn normally.
Just a thought, as you can tell by my name, I am really interested in sports what-ifs.
I bounced this idea off a freind who knows a lot more than I do about sports and he emphasizes how conservative franchise owners were. So integration of sports is not going to happen overnight. Basically the Human Equality Movement is climbing a steep mountain. It is not hopeless but it is not an instantaneously effective silver bullet to the problems of the time.
Franz Josef II said:
The notion that Catholic lay people are not as involved in the Mass as they should be, that they should be participating not merely attending, was actually blooming in the early decades ox XX Century. In fact St. Pius X was in sympathy with this and he was a strong advocate of active participation. However he reversed the trend in the development of sacred music under Pope Leo and in his motu proprio Tra la Sollectudini proclaimed a renewed emphasis on Gregorian Chant to be solution to the current liturgical woes. It shall be noted--Why Catholics Can't Sing is excellent on this point--is that the Irish Catholic American largely ignored both the developments under Leo and Pius in its emphasis on the quiet Mass.
What I am presenting is a much slower, more incremental and organic path to liturgical reform that OTL.
The Great War ends with the new German government embracing the Joint Peace Plan of President Hughes and Pope Innocent. An armistice very very similar to OTL results. However one different aspect is that the Pope is invited to Versailles. However he is very old by now and his physicians are strongly opposed. He sends the secretary of state, Cardinal della Chiesa instead. Both della Chiese and President Hughes have a lot of problems at Versailles, esp. with Clemenceau who vociferously opposed Vatican involved. It was also feared that the joint American/Vatican interest in Irish independence would cause trouble but the Welsh Wizard casts his turbocharged charm spell and President Hughes fails to make his saving throw. Cardinal della Chiesa is not charmed though.
Hughes and E. Root, his secretary of state as well as Pope Innocent support a League of Nations proposal. However it is not exactly the Wilsonian version but is based more upon Taft's League to Enforce Peace (which would've had more teeth than either the League of Nations or the UN). Still it is internationalist enough to draw the scorn of fellow Republican, Henry Cabot Lodge. Sensing a threat of another Republican schism, Hughes backs the League of Nations idea more hesitantly than Wilson did OTL. Combined with with the bad relationship with France, the League of Nations is stillborn.
Otherwise Versailles is very very close to OTL (I am open to suggestions about minor differences).
Because of Pope Innocent's interaction with Scheler Edith Stein converts to Catholcism in 1918 (instead of 1921 OTL). Of the philosophers that Pope Inncocent has correspended with, Maritain has made the greatest impression on him. In Feb 1920 Pope Innocent issues the encyclical Apostolicam Actuositatem that places a greater emphasis of the role of the laity than the Church is used and this is due in part to the influence of Maritain. This encyclical causes more of a stir than Pope Innocent has expected. Already in late 1919 European magazines have begun running stories entitled 'Is the Catholic Church Heading for Schism?". In the usual media echo chamber effect they say the same things over and over. Pope Innocent is deeply saddened by this and is rather baffled. He thinks that he had tried to avoid controversy during his pontificate and has only followed basic principles.
In June of 1920 he comes to a conclusion that the First Vatican Council was interrupted with too much business unfnished. He declares his intent to call a new council to resolve the unfinished business.
The Curia is not happy with this decision.
Next: The Election of 1920 and the Conclave of 1921.
Hughes and E. Root, his secretary of state as well as Pope Innocent support a League of Nations proposal. However it is not exactly the Wilsonian version but is based more upon Taft's League to Enforce Peace (which would've had more teeth than either the League of Nations or the UN). Still it is internationalist enough to draw the scorn of fellow Republican, Henry Cabot Lodge. Sensing a threat of another Republican schism, Hughes backs the League of Nations idea more hesitantly than Wilson did OTL. Combined with with the bad relationship with France, the League of Nations is stillborn.
Otherwise Versailles is very very close to OTL (I am open to suggestions about minor differences).
Because of Pope Innocent's interaction with Scheler Edith Stein converts to Catholcism in 1918 (instead of 1921 OTL). Of the philosophers that Pope Inncocent has correspended with, Maritain has made the greatest impression on him. In Feb 1920 Pope Innocent issues the encyclical Apostolicam Actuositatem that places a greater emphasis of the role of the laity than the Church is used and this is due in part to the influence of Maritain. This encyclical causes more of a stir than Pope Innocent has expected. Already in late 1919 European magazines have begun running stories entitled 'Is the Catholic Church Heading for Schism?". In the usual media echo chamber effect they say the same things over and over. Pope Innocent is deeply saddened by this and is rather baffled. He thinks that he had tried to avoid controversy during his pontificate and has only followed basic principles.
In June of 1920 he comes to a conclusion that the First Vatican Council was interrupted with too much business unfnished. He declares his intent to call a new council to resolve the unfinished business.
The Curia is not happy with this decision.
Next: The Election of 1920 and the Conclave of 1921.
Max Sinister
Banned
Wendell said:Aren't the young people leaving the Church as it is in much of the world?
Yes - although there's a smaller but active group in the church. Without Vatican II, there might be even more leaving.
1920 Election 1921 Conclave
In 1920 President Hughes is under pressure from elements of the Republican Party not to promote the League of Nations. Henry Cabot Lodge has threatened to run against Hughes if the President pushes for the League of Nations. The Republicans are also worried that he has become too cozy with Pope Innocent (Gibbons). There are some that are whispering that Hughes is getting reading to convert--and may have done so secretly.
The Democrats are trying to figure out how to reclaim the Catholic vote without endangering their support in the South. Senator James O'Gorman of NY, an Irish Catholic, becomes the leading challenger of Governor James Cox of Ohio. This only makes the tension inside the Democratic Party worse. Hughes goes on to defeat Cox by a comfortable margin.
CHristmas Day 1920 Pope Innocent dies. This is slightly earlier than OTL and is due to the stress of the Papacy. He has lived longer than the curial bookmakers had thought possible. He is widely loved in the United States and Ireland but in Continental Europe he is regarded with considerable ambivalence.
Pope Innocent has just begun preparations for a Second Vatican Council. He is not completely happy with his Papcy and feels himself to be deeply misunderstood.
When the conclave assembles Jan 1921 the bookmakers are virtuallu certain that the Italians will retake the Papacy and give Cardinal della Chiesa 2:1 odds. The cardinals fall into 3 broad groups:
1] Clementines -- Those who are in agreement with the policoies of Clement (Rampolla) and Innocent (Gibbons). Thisy are approx 1/2 the cardinals attending. They have some internal divisions esp. over the wisdom of a council. The curialists and some others are opposed while others are in favor.
2] Antimodernists -- This group is deeply upset that the Pope has done little to counter the posion of the Modernist heresies in the CHurch. In fact some of them think Clement and Innocent are themselves close to heresy on some issues. This group is about 1/5 of the Cardinals. They too are divided about a council. Some of them think it is a great idea and look forward to it issuing a long litany of anathemas. One Antimodernist Cardinal likes to compare it to a much needed enema.
3] The In between group -- Cardinals who don't fall into the other 2 groups. Mostly they are deeply fearful of schism and see a need to find a compromise candidate.
Now each of these 3 groups has an Italian as its lead candidate. The Clementine candidate is Cardinal della Chiesa. The groups do not move and he is unable to get the need 2/3. The Clementines fall back on candidate @ 2 Pietro Cardinal Maffi but he does no better. The impasse goes on a long while. eventually some of the Middle Group let it be known they will support Desire Cardinal mercier of Belgium. The reason for this is complex but the most important element is the inflated reports of his his unhappiness in the late years of Pope Innocent lead them to think he has moved away from the Clementines.
So the bookmakers are again proven wrong. Poor Cardinal della Chiesa is again denied the Papacy. In the AH.COM of this TL there is a thread runnign entitled "WI della Chiesa became Pope".
Cardinal Mercier takes the name of Leo XIV. While he does not hate Cardinal della Chiesa (despite what you read in the papers) he is not completely comfortable with him and soon replaces him with Cardinal Maffi, another Clementine.
Next: The Papcy of Pope Leo XIV.
In 1920 President Hughes is under pressure from elements of the Republican Party not to promote the League of Nations. Henry Cabot Lodge has threatened to run against Hughes if the President pushes for the League of Nations. The Republicans are also worried that he has become too cozy with Pope Innocent (Gibbons). There are some that are whispering that Hughes is getting reading to convert--and may have done so secretly.
The Democrats are trying to figure out how to reclaim the Catholic vote without endangering their support in the South. Senator James O'Gorman of NY, an Irish Catholic, becomes the leading challenger of Governor James Cox of Ohio. This only makes the tension inside the Democratic Party worse. Hughes goes on to defeat Cox by a comfortable margin.
CHristmas Day 1920 Pope Innocent dies. This is slightly earlier than OTL and is due to the stress of the Papacy. He has lived longer than the curial bookmakers had thought possible. He is widely loved in the United States and Ireland but in Continental Europe he is regarded with considerable ambivalence.
Pope Innocent has just begun preparations for a Second Vatican Council. He is not completely happy with his Papcy and feels himself to be deeply misunderstood.
When the conclave assembles Jan 1921 the bookmakers are virtuallu certain that the Italians will retake the Papacy and give Cardinal della Chiesa 2:1 odds. The cardinals fall into 3 broad groups:
1] Clementines -- Those who are in agreement with the policoies of Clement (Rampolla) and Innocent (Gibbons). Thisy are approx 1/2 the cardinals attending. They have some internal divisions esp. over the wisdom of a council. The curialists and some others are opposed while others are in favor.
2] Antimodernists -- This group is deeply upset that the Pope has done little to counter the posion of the Modernist heresies in the CHurch. In fact some of them think Clement and Innocent are themselves close to heresy on some issues. This group is about 1/5 of the Cardinals. They too are divided about a council. Some of them think it is a great idea and look forward to it issuing a long litany of anathemas. One Antimodernist Cardinal likes to compare it to a much needed enema.
3] The In between group -- Cardinals who don't fall into the other 2 groups. Mostly they are deeply fearful of schism and see a need to find a compromise candidate.
Now each of these 3 groups has an Italian as its lead candidate. The Clementine candidate is Cardinal della Chiesa. The groups do not move and he is unable to get the need 2/3. The Clementines fall back on candidate @ 2 Pietro Cardinal Maffi but he does no better. The impasse goes on a long while. eventually some of the Middle Group let it be known they will support Desire Cardinal mercier of Belgium. The reason for this is complex but the most important element is the inflated reports of his his unhappiness in the late years of Pope Innocent lead them to think he has moved away from the Clementines.
So the bookmakers are again proven wrong. Poor Cardinal della Chiesa is again denied the Papacy. In the AH.COM of this TL there is a thread runnign entitled "WI della Chiesa became Pope".
Cardinal Mercier takes the name of Leo XIV. While he does not hate Cardinal della Chiesa (despite what you read in the papers) he is not completely comfortable with him and soon replaces him with Cardinal Maffi, another Clementine.
Next: The Papcy of Pope Leo XIV.