Odd-number years are often painfully unsatisfying to devoted political junkies, the type that fervently read Nate Silver and make sure not to schedule any plans on Election Day. This off year, those interested can only turn to gubernatorial races in Virginia and New Jersey, in addition to the soporific qua Senate special election closer to home. Yet February was an unexpectedly uplifting month for fans of palace intrigue, and not just because of Netflix’s single-day release of “House of Cards.” Rather, world watchers have been provided the chance to witness the most interesting exercise in international politics—the selection of the successor to pontifex emeritus Benedict XVI.

When Pope Benedict XVI announced his resignation earlier this month, American liberal commentators began conjuring fatuous scenarios in which the Roman Catholic Church would quadrate with their progressive ideal of a crusader for social justice that is permissive of changing social norms. Former Crimson editor E.J. Dionne ’73 penned a provocative editorial calling on the College of Cardinals to forego two millennia of tradition and elect a nun. Others have chimerically proffered the suggestion of a Bishop of Rome in favor of same-sex marriage or abortion rights.

Regardless of the merits of these liberal pipedreams, such fabulous thinking serves little purpose when it comes to prognosticating the next pope. This is because each of the papabili was appointed by either conservative Pope Benedict XVI or his conservative predecessor, John Paul II. As such, the papal statecraft of the upcoming weeks will not fall on the left-right spectrum familiar to modern American pundits. Rather, those with their eyes on the Catholic Church will witness an old-fashioned display of regional politics, with the majoritarian faction of the Italian old-guard pitted against the new world stewards of growing global Catholicism. If the cardinals are mindful of the issues guaranteed to plague the 286th pontiff of the Roman Catholic Church, they will select a papabile from outside of Europe’s boot.

Italian cardinals are likely to make a strong play for the pontificate, which has been on a 35-year hiatus from Mediterranean control. The election of Polish John Paul II in 1978 put the first foreigner in the Vatican in 455 years, and recent reports of the inner workings of the world’s smallest nation suggest that the Italian delegation is itching again for control.

Like in all countries, the responsibilities of the Vatican’s chief executive are geminate—the leader has to manage both domestic affairs and foreign policy. The latter might be especially important to the Holy See, insofar as the number of believers it maintains the world over is directly correlated with its legitimacy and moral authority. Unfortunately, the most recent papacy has succumbed to imbroglios in both realms, and it will be up to Benedict XVI’s replacement to right an increasingly tremulous ship. The next pope needs character such as that manifest in John Paul II, who was able to successfully toe the line between proselytism and diplomacy.

On the domestic side, Vatican City is currently in utter disarray. The shambolic condition of the apparently venal curia led Benedict’s butler, who was tried for stealing important papers from the desk of the pope, to describe his former boss as “a pure man in the midst of wolves.” Documents have been unearthed demonstrating how officials have been exiled for attempting to expose corruption within the city-state’s administration, and there is ongoing controversy surrounding the cozy relationship between the Vatican Bank and the Italian Mafia. All of this has been humiliatingly augmented by rumors of a secret dossier adumbrating claims of gay orgies and blackmail among high-ranking clergy. The Vatican has ascribed to the code of omertà in these instances, but even a grain of truth signifies the antithesis of good governance.

While it is easy to blame the cerebral ex-pope for a failure in executive leadership, it is also important to consider the identity of the power brokers in the Holy See. The Italian lobby is by far the largest interest group in the College of Cardinals, and their dominant position has reportedly been the source of pronounced infighting over which of them would eventually accede to the cathedra following Benedict’s departure. The election of any of them will inevitably lead to more internecine tumult, which is the last thing the Church needs as it continues to hemorrhage devoted followers.

This is the other crucial issue the next pontiff must address. Western Europe is now rife with secularism, and many nominal Catholics have become shaky, if not completely lapsed, in their beliefs. It would be difficult for a pope to come from a nation where even his own congregation has doubts about his spiritual primacy. For this reason, those who can circumnavigate their own ambition long enough to think about the future of the Church should look toward the developing world, where faith is both strong and growing. The College of Cardinals is lucky to have a host of compelling candidates from Latin America, Africa, and Southeast Asia. While it would be naïve to suggest that cardinals from outside of the Italian peninsula are immune to political maneuvering, there is no doubt that a cardinal change in the Vatican’s personnel could only lead to a more catholic and apostolic future for the Roman Catholic Church.

John F. M. Kocsis ’15, a Crimson editorial writer, is a government concentrator in Eliot House. His column appears on alternate Fridays.