By Robert Royal.

A high-placed Cardinal complained this past week that some people - particularly some traditional Catholics - are hoping that Pope Francis will die. There are such Catholics, and their open disrespect for the successor of Peter, whatever his record, is simply wrong. But the way that they and the whole world take notice when the Pope of Rome may be exiting this mortal life to be replaced by another head of a Church that numbers nearly 1.4 billion members indicates that, despite all the problems and outright failures of Christianity in the modern world, its historic leader (in some ways even for many Protestants) still matters.

At this moment, when the pope is in critical condition, it's only natural for people to look around and wonder: Who would be the best person to lead the Church as we enter the second quarter of the twenty-first century?

It's an impossible question to answer, and there's great wisdom in the old Roman phrase Chi entra papa in conclave, esce cardinale ("Who enters a conclave as pope exits as a cardinal.") There have been just too many "frontrunners" who were never chosen. But if you're looking for information, the best place is The College of Cardinals Report.

Besides, it's only seemly to wait until the current occupant of the Chair of Peter has passed on before speculating. But it's useful - not only for those of us who will live under the next pope but for the next pope himself - to consider not who but what we will need in the next few years. And the simple answer to that question is: It's complicated.

I briefly scandalized my colleagues in the "Conclave Crew" (the precursor of the EWTN Papal Posse) the first time in 2013 that we all met in Rome. I was convinced then - and still am - that we don't need another "teaching" pope, by which I mean a pontiff and a Church that propose many "new things" to the world, except the uniquely New Thing, Jesus Christ, the beauty tam antiqua, tam nova ("ever ancient, ever new") in St. Augustine's phrase.

Our God may be a God of surprises, but just now my sense is that we need much less that's novel, interesting, and "surprising," much more that is plain, solid, and sane. Between JPII and Benedict XVI, we were given an enormous spiritual, moral, and social legacy that still desperately needs to be absorbed at every level of the Church - from the tiniest parish to the most powerful dicasteries in Rome - and even beyond.

Because even the most simple elements of Christianity have been slipping away from the culture and often from the Church herself. A wise woman of my acquaintance recently pointed out to me that in 2023 on the popular quiz show "Jeopardy," three contestants were asked to fill in the phrase "Our Father who art in Heaven, blank be Thy Name." None was able to do so.

In a culture where that can happen, many of the things that are regarded as "issues" the Church must tackle - things like gender, climate, mass immigration, most politics - are first-world luxury concerns. If we believe that God became Man to save us from our sins in order to prepare us for eternal life then certain priorities arise.

The most urgent thing any pope must do in our day is to get people to look beyond material matters to the spiritual dimensions of reality as a preparation for encountering the Lord of Creation. That's always been a problem, of course, but the situation is worse today given the sheer power of modern science and technology. Indeed, there's no small temptation these days to worship the work of our digital - and increasingly AI-generated - hands. But that is a snare and a delusion, even something of an open idol.

Several prelates have the gifts to address this problem and would make good popes, other things being equal. But other things aren't equal, and the next pontiff is also going to have to have a very different set of skills in order to carry out a deep reform of the Vatican itself, especially the tangled mess of sex scandals and financial irregula...