WI Cardinal Montini is not elected Pope Paul VI in 1963?

In the Conclave of 1963 Cardinal Montini was the front runner to succeed Pope John XXIII... However in the first ballots he was contested by Cardinal Siri and Cardinal Urbani who also obtained votes...
Cardinal Montini thought of withdrawing his candidacy but Cardinal Urbani convinced him not to do so and he supported him in the subsequent ballot... So Cardinal Montini became Pope Paul VI...
WI Cardinal Urbani didnot supported Montini? None of the 3 front runners could obtain the 2/3 majority and this would lead to a deadlock and propably a compromise candidate would be chosen...
How is Church history changed without Pope Paul VI??
Any thoughts?
 
An "Urban legend" I read on the internet a few years back stated that Siri actually did win that election but declined after those opposed refused to abide by the decision. Had Siri won, the outcome of Vatican II would have been very different.
 
Thats just an urban legend... I dont doubt that Siri obtained some votes (enough maybe to bring him close to St. Peter's Chair) but i seriously contest that he was "vetoed" by Communists... Besides this thing with the secular vetoes was abolished by Pope Pius X in 1903...
 
We'd still be celebrating Mass using the 1962 Missal, even if Vatican II goes ahead. Even with that POD, the Council was already in place, and much the same documents would have been ratified. Perhaps Bugnini would not be as prominent as he was OTL.

Another consequence might be that Lefebvreism being dead in the water, due to no real percieved need for schism. Marcel Lefebvre would probably be just another French cardinal, on the conservative side of things, but would still be with the Church, becoming in a sense a European Burke. The SSPX, if it exists in this timeline, would probably remain just another "Traditionalist" religious order in good standing with Rome, with a role similar to the FSSP today.
 
Top