Unholy Sh+t: a former priest explains how accurate the movie Conclave is compared to what will happen on May 7th

An image of Ralph Fiennes from the movie Conclave, distributed by Focus Features

I am a movie buff. Long before I ever donned the priestly robes and ascended the altar, my dream was to be an actor and filmmaker. I had written the treatise for my first script before I graduated from high school. However, shortly after graduating, I felt a distinct call. My best friend in the industry had secured an apartment in Los Angeles, and we were making plans to go to Hollywood to follow in the footsteps of the greats. We had built resumes back home in Nashville, working on short films, commercials, and a metric f+ckton of country music videos. A few weeks before our planned adventure out to La La Land, I felt a divine pull to leave that world behind and join the ministry.

However, my love for movies never faded. I am the type of weirdo who will go see a film all by my lonesome at the theater. I will sit there with my popcorn and candies, enjoying all of the magic of cinema.

Becoming a priest ruined a particular genre of films for me almost entirely: religious-based horror films. Though they are not exclusively guilty of butchering reality, they do it the most frequently. Movies so often get the details wrong about the life of priests. Sometimes it's subtle things that the average person might not notice, like placing a priest in a cassock that only a bishop would wear or getting the liturgical colors of the chasuble wrong. These minor grievances are like Sister Mary Clarence running her fingers on the chalkboard, but some errors are so egregious that the directors should be embarrassed. I mean, you can buy a Roman Rite at Barnes and Noble for Christ's sake, it's all written down, so there is no reason whatsoever for them to be f+cking up the liturgy… I am rambling. The point is, most movies get it grossly incorrect to the point that it is almost offensive.

And then they made Conclave.

This movie became offensive to some not because they got wrong, but because it is so grossly correct.

Unholy Sh+t

Special Edition - The Papacy

Chapter Two: How Accurate is the Movie Conclave

(This article contains spoilers about the movie Conclave; proceed with caution.)

Watching Conclave for the first time was downright triggering at moments. The character of Cardinal Tedesco sent shivers down my spine as he instantly reminded me of a priest I once knew. I burst out in laughter upon later finding out that they were both part of an obscure but dangerous sect within the Roman Church: Tridentine Rite Catholics. I could tell right from the get-go this movie was going to land uncomfortably close to the truth. I suppose it would be better writing to hold off the part that most people want to know for the end but I’m not a big fan of burying the lead: the main points of this movie, as far as the actions of the camerlengo (played by Ralph Fiennes) to the events leading up to and during the conclave are remarkably accurate. The attention to detail given by the director, costume designers, and set builders should be commended and become a standard barrier for all religious-based films that wish to be taken seriously, regardless of what faith they are representing.

I think it is for this reason that so many devout Catholics took such offense to the film. It got it all right, and that should be very concerning for us all.

There are factions within the church that are, especially now, fighting a Holy War within their own ranks for the very nature of what the Catholic Church will become in the decades ahead. More liberal-leaning cardinals are certainly mindful that the next pope could either continue in Francis' mission or send us back to a pre-Vatican II era. Conversely, traditionalists are hoping for a future that very much looks like the past. This war has been raging ever since Benedict XVI took the unprecedented action of resigning the papacy instead of just dying like everyone else had for almost six hundred years. The resignation of such leadership within the Church has not been the norm for some time. In contrast, it is far more common in other liturgical faith traditions like the Episcopal and Orthodox Churches.

Francis outraged the far-right and traditionalist Catholics with his humble approach, tolerant tone, and refusal to commonly allow for the Latin Mass to be used.

Because of the oddity that a pope resigned, many began to speculate foul play, as if Benedict had been pushed out, and though the former pontiff denied such claims, the lore continued to circulate. Doubts began to be cast about the legitimacy of the reign of Francis, and talks of a potential schism began to swirl. Those concerns have certainly not subsided, and the reality of such a break within the world's largest Christian denomination still hangs over this upcoming conclave like a cloud of white smoke. All of these realities, this fear of a fissure, are certainly on the minds of each cardinal, regardless of their own personal views, and they will have to weigh the potential division over possible advancements to their agendas. Very much like when Solomon threatened to split the baby, the so-called liberal minded bishops would be more likely to yield for the sake of peace than their traditionalist counterparts, making the dread that we could end up with a traditionalist pope a very real, and grave, concern for many.

That does not mean that all hope is lost, and so we must evaluate the many possibilities that this film has illuminated.

One of the many things that Catholics believe about the election process of the pope is that this is less political and more a moment where the Holy Spirit moves through the modern day apostles as They once did thousands of years ago when the original apostles assembled during the first council of the church in Jerusalem as recounted in Acts 15. In order to understand what is about to happen, you need to know that the Catholic Church, like the Orthodox Church, believes in a tradition known as Apostolic Succession. This theology believes that every priest, and subsequently every bishop, is ordained in a direct and unbroken line from the first apostles. Meaning that the bishop who ordained me was ordained by his bishop, and that lineage goes all the way back to the very first twelve men who traveled with Jesus—an unbroken line of laying hands in ordination back to those who walked with God.

What this film, Conclave, did was demystify much of that.

It ripped open the veil and invited us into the politics of the Sistine Chapel as we watch arrogant men vie for power and humble men become silent hopefuls. Then, of course, there are men who appear humble who are snakes in the garden waiting to lure us in for the forbidden fruit of self-importance. The politics of the church were on full display, and it was made sickeningly clear that it is, in fact, men, flawed human beings, not the Holy Spirit, who will fight for nothing but self-interest if given the chance. The film, for what it is worth, does give the appearance that the Spirit of God wins the day when it is all said and done but, we live in a real world and not one of make believe, so we must prepare for the reality that politics still might win the day and that could have real life consequences for many of us.

Some of the details that the film got correct are the elements that might be harder for folks to understand, like Cardinal Lawrence crying over the death of the pope. Because the pope is a public figure surrounded by mystery, it’s easy for us to forget that these are real people and that others have deep personal relationships with them. Remember that the pope is most often pulled from the ranks of bishops and that these clergy have usually gathered for special occasions. Many of these men know each other from their youth when they began their ministry journey back in seminary. Those working around the pope are often people they’ve built trust with over the decades. I was even shocked to see that the film accurately portrayed how common smoking is amongst the clergy. Even finer details, like there being numerous papal cassocks in different sizes, are a likely accurate detail because the new people will be selected and then quickly ushered out to be greeted by the faithful in uproarious applause as they are revealed for the first time in Saint Peter’s Square.

Then there are strange questions the film leaves us with, like could there be a secret cardinal out there somewhere, and the answer is yes. The word catholic literally means universal, and the church exists even in areas we might not be as keenly aware of. There could absolutely be cardinals, bishops, and priests in more dangerous regions that are either ordained in secret or are given dispensations to suspend requirements, like wearing their priestly attire in public, performing the mass daily, or other such things that might draw attention to them in hostile areas of the world. I have personally known priests who functioned under such conditions. There are bishops who now no longer live under these fears, but it is known they used to have a more secret life while residing in countries or regions where it would have been dangerous to them or the faithful if their identities had been known. The higher rank a member of the clergy receives, the more likely they are to be subject to attack in such territories. So yes, much like the character of Cardinal Benitez (beautifully portrayed by Carlos Diehz) such a mystery person could exist out there in the world and appear for the conclave.

One detail I found a bit unusual, and I personally think unlikely ever to happen, is when Cardinal Lawrence unseals the door to the papal apartment while conducting an investigation. For dramatic effect, it is undoubtedly a fascinating tool for storytelling. However, such an instance would be highly unlikely. The Vatican, like any such institution, is full of folks who will gladly sell a story to the tabloids. If the seal to the Papal apartment were broken, that would be international news by morning. Also, the Vatican has its own police, courts, and judges. I could not personally find any instance where such a thing has happened, nor even any protocol for handling something like this. Based upon my knowledge of how the church functions, I would place this in the speculative fantasy category.

The movie did have a slightly prophetic moment about an actual showdown happening within the Vatican right now. In the film, Cardinal Tremblay, played by John Lithgow, is embroiled in a financial scandal and relieved of his duties by the pope. While it is playing out slightly differently in real life than in the movie, it is nonetheless a very notable moment leading into the current conclave. The real-life Cardinal Giovanni Angelo Becciu, essentially the secretary of state for the Vatican, who once held “walk-in” privileges to see the pope, was tried and convicted by a Vatican court for fraud and embezzlement. Pope Francis removed his rights and privileges as a cardinal but stopped short of actually removing his title of cardinal or faculties as clergy. As a result, Cardinal Becciu has challenged the meaning of this action and is making the claim that he is still allowed to participate in the upcoming conclave. This dramatic case is playing out in a similar fashion to the film version, minus the fact that these revelations are public knowledge and are not something coming out after the doors have been closed.

Something that Conclave brushes over, or at least doesn’t supply the audience with enough details on, is what the real battle between the conservative and liberal factions are actually about. Words and phrases are floated in the dialogue to give the viewer just enough to Google when they get home if they wish to understand more but not enough for folks to have walked out of the theatre with a true understand why the next papal election, which is now on our doorstep, could bring about remarkable change or revert the Catholic Church back into the dark ages.

For hundreds of years, the Catholic Mass had been in Latin. The liturgy was long and very few of the faithful understood what was being said. This was one of the fundamental differences between the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church, the debate over vernacular or common language being used in the services. Whereas the Orthodox Church had gone to extreme lengths to make sure that the language of the people would be used in the services, going so far as to invent an alphabet for the Kievan Rus’ people, which would eventually become the framework for modern Russian. The Catholic Church countered this by describing Latin, a dead language, as the language of the Church. This meant that most who went to church on Sunday neither understood the liturgy nor the scriptures being read from the lectionary. Then, in the 1960s, Pope John XXIII called the first church council in nearly a hundred years. The purpose of this action was to help propel the church into the future. Some of the primary focuses of this council were to put an emphasis on vernacular language translations of the Bible, along with Bible studies to help put the scriptures into the hands of the faithful. Another significant change was to the liturgy itself. Not only was a vernacular language liturgy adopted, but the liturgy itself was substantially shortened.

While the actions of Vatican II were praised by many within the church, low Gregorian grunts could be heard from all corners of the earth by traditionalists who do not care much for change, and in an institution based on “unchanging truth,” the idea of even the smallest update can be viewed as anathema. Almost as soon as the council came to a close, rumors of its illegality began. Some traditionalist priests worked in open rebellion against the changes, and compromises would be made. Special dispensation would be given to some clergy to continue serving the Mass in Latin, especially using the Tridentine Liturgy. However, this may have proven to be a grave error. This fraction would begin to view itself as carrying on the genuine traditions of the church, while the rest of the church was operating in near heresy for decades. The crescendo to these events would be the resignation of Pope Benedict, who was viewed as more sympathetic to the traditionalists, and the ascension of Pope Francis, who was seen as the worst conclusion of the sins of Vatican II.

The only person who can call an ecumenical church council in the Roman Catholic Church, and the person who holds the distinction of infallibility, is the Pope. If a restoration of the church goes back to a time of the old ways, the Tridentine Mass, and all of the pomp that pre-dated the Second Vatican Council, it would be the man who sits on the throne of Saint Peter.

Since the 1960s, and the implementation of the policies of Vatican II, many changes have occurred within the Church of Rome. Though women have still yet to receive full rights to ordination, girls are allowed to be altar servers, nuns have been given more prominent roles in church leadership, and more progressive ideas have been allowed for discussion without it leading to immediate excommunication. Once, certain opinions on issues like contraceptions, abortion, and gay marriage would have resulted in a tribunal; now, these can be freely debated in Catholic magazines and blogs. Pope Francis famously allowed for gay people, including couples, to receive blessings just like anyone else. While these are baby steps without question, they have set the stage for the potential modernization of one of the oldest institutions in the world. All of this progress could reach a grinding halt depending on who becomes the next person to hold the keys to the kingdom.

Should a traditionalist, similar to the character of Cardinal Tedesco, become pope, it would result in an undoing of it all. That wouldn’t simply mean that the Church would just adopt Latin again as the language of the Church, but it could also mean a complete reversal of other fundamental changes of transparency within the Vatican. It would mean that any work that has been done to undo the heinous actions that were exposed by the scandal of rampant sexual violence that children suffered at the hands of the church, including exposing the horrific actions that took place in schools were indigenous children were kidnapped, stripped of their culture, and many ultimately lost their lives. The Roman Catholic Church has had many sins to atone for, and any such restitution will not take place if the ship is captained by a traditionalist who yearns for such a bygone era.

Many things subtly alluded to in the film would suddenly become realities. We are currently living in a world where fascism is on the rise globally, and there is no longer an Allied Forces to fight it, at least not in the way that existed during the time of World War II. During that global conflict, the Roman Catholic Church took a stance of neutrality. For as many stories that exist of local nuns and priests fighting against the fascists, for his part, Pope Pius XII did little to stand up against the atrocities happening at the hands of the Third Reich. While Francis has frequently opined on the horrors happening in Gaza and Ukraine, a pope who would remain silent on such issues could have global consequences. Additionally, a Roman Catholic Church that reverted to a time when it was allowed to kidnap children for reprogramming could be highly weaponized by a fascist government that is currently kidnapping children.

Much like the film Conclave depicts, the upcoming conclave has very real and potentially dire consequences far beyond what language is used in the liturgy. It is a Holy Civil War fighting for the very soul, should one still exist within it, of the largest Christian denomination.

For all of the demystifying that the film does, its ending is still nothing short of miraculous, leaving the illusion that, at the end of the day, righteousness will prevail. After all of the drama of the two hour long movie, its final conclusion is that, as embattled men fight for the agendas, an unknown cardinal who seems pure of heart eventually rises to the top of the contenders after giving an impromptu sermon reminding all of the cardinals that we serve of God who seeks love and kindness over silly things like traditions of men. Convicted by this sermon, given by the mysterious Cardinal Benitez, they are ultimately elected as the new pope. Yet, in a final twist to the film, we find out that Benitez is intersex, meaning that though they present as a man, they also have genetic and physical markers identified with a woman. It is further revealed that the previous pope was aware of this and not only allowed Benitez to remain a priest, but also elevated them to a cardinal, thus ushering the church and world into a new horizon.

Could this actually happen? Well, that is an issue of much debate. Technically, in order to be ordained, a priest must be “without blemish,” and this has often been used to prohibit individuals with disabilities or who are viewed in any way as “other” from ascending to the priesthood. There have been instances of such later revelations about a clergy, such as a disability that was not known or disclosed, resulting in some sort of action being taken. Certainly, a case of someone being intersex being a priest would, without question, result in some kind of investigation, and that could ultimately lead to the pope being the decider of what is right in this situation. In the case made in this movie, the previous pope had already decided that this person was eligible to remain a priest and therefore qualified to become pope. This is the moment when a film that is very much rooted in reality and lacking in the miraculous suddenly asks the audience to willfully suspend disbelief and hope for a world where the Catholic Church could make substantial change, not that much unlike the changes that took place during Vatican II, the great enemy of traditionalists, and hope that a better world is in fact possible.

It is possible, as the scriptures say, “all things are possible with God.” Sadly, it will be men assembling in this conclave and whether they have the testicular fortitude to listen to the Divine instead of their dicks is the question of the ages. Conclave got it right on nearly every minute detail, better than any film I’ve ever seen, and should you wish to better understand what the election process of a pope looks like in the modern world, I highly recommend it. During his time in office, Pope Francis elevated the vast majority of the cardinals who will be of voting age during the upcoming conclave. That does not mean that they all agreed with him on every issue, and those men should certainly not be looked at as carbon copies of Francis. Yet, there are also some who will be entering the Sistine Chapel who have fun far further than Francis could have ever imagined. Liberal men who have called the question on issues ranging from ordaining women to the priesthood and even the potential of finally welcoming our LGBTQ+ siblings into full communion. Hope is not lost, but I can not stress enough how much the fate of the world rests upon this election. The Church of Rome will shift us further into the dark or be prepared for the fight of the century. Which way we go hinges now on the person who will become the leader of the most powerful Christian institution the world has ever known.

What we should all fear is not what the movie got right, but what it might have gotten most wrong: that the will of man, and not the Divine, might win the day.