The coffin of Pope Francis, who had died four days earlier, was closed in St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome late in the evening of April 25, 2025. Before the closing, a metal tube, the so-called Rogitum, was added to the coffin. This is a pontifical document in Latin that commemorates important stages in the life of the deceased and key events in his work as a priest, bishop, cardinal and pope.
This document points out that the deceased pope was “always attentive to the least and the outcasts of society,” that he often “raised his voice to protect the innocent” and that he “tightened legislation against crimes committed by clerics against minors or vulnerable persons.”
These characteristics of the late pope are perhaps best summarized in the metaphor that, although unfortunately not mentioned in the Rogitum itself, Pope Francis coined for the church from the beginning of his ministry as pontiff. It is a field hospital, a place where wounds are dressed and healed. Ultimately, it is about a place that is safe, where no (new) wounds are inflicted.
Starting points
We do not know for sure whether not only the Rogitum itself but also the leitmotifs and core concerns of the late Pope Francis described in it will disappear together with Francis’ coffin in the grave. A great deal depends on how his successor will behave in this regard—and how he will face up to the associated challenges. This is a question of both will and ability. Will the cardinals assembled for the conclave make an appropriate choice and find a suitable candidate? Are they prepared to appoint someone as Pope Francis’ successor who, at least in this respect, is prepared to both continue and develop his work? Will they pick someone who will do everything in his power to ensure that the church is a safe place where no one has to fear abuse in any form whatsoever?
There may be practical concerns to be worked out among some cardinals. There may also be different degrees of personal closeness to consider, as well as assessments of individual projects of the previous pope (such as the reform of the Curia or the pastoral treatment of certain groups of people). Ultimately, however, there is broad agreement on this one issue: Abuse is a crime.
Abuse destroys human lives and, ultimately, it destroys the church from within. It must be combated in the spirit of Jesus both inside and outside the church, remaining faithful to his option for the weak and vulnerable, his message of salvation and the resulting mission of the church. Working positively for the protection of people through safeguarding and providing impetus in this sense in the church and for the world is an integral expression of Christian faith.
Pope Francis’ predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI, began to lay out some corresponding lines for safeguarding against abuse in the life of the church. Pope Francis continued and extended these lines. His successor has the task of picking up where he left off and continuing resolutely. But how to find the right person? How to recognize the one who has the will and the ability to take decisive action against abuse? What are the decisive criteria that provide orientation?
Points of orientation
It is worth looking at the Child Protection Summit that took place in Rome in 2019, where all the presidents of the bishops’ conferences of the universal church, a representation of the superiors general of the religious orders of men and women, the patriarchs of the Eastern churches in union with Rome and the prefects of the Vatican dicasteries met to address the issue of dealing appropriately with the sexual abuse of minors within the church’s sphere of responsibility.
It is also worth looking at the documents of the Synod of Bishops that took place from 2021 to 2024 on the topic “A Synodal Church: Community, Participation and Mission,” on the occasion of which the self-image of the church was and is still being debated, not least in light of the church abuse scandal. Both times, both implicitly and explicitly, reference was made to three elements that can be identified as particularly important for safeguarding. These are (1) transparency or communication, (2) compliance and (3) accountability.
The significance of these three elements becomes all the clearer the more one realizes that all abuse, be it sexual, psychological, physical, spiritual or similar, is ultimately an abuse of power by one person over another. In order to prevent this on the one hand and to use power sensibly for the benefit of people on the other, power always requires control. In view of the fundamental and inescapable sinfulness of every human being, their weaknesses and their susceptibility to mistakes, no one should be endowed with absolutely unlimited power. Or, to put it in another, more positive way: Those who have power are dependent on help and must also be prepared to be helped.
Safeguarding
Transparency, compliance and accountability are concrete expressions of such help. Transparency makes the exercise of power perceptible; it can be identified and named as such. As it can be named, it can also be discussed; arguments for and against power can be put forward, and the way in which it is exercised can be assessed differently. In this respect, compliance offers a certain objectification of the discussion about power and the exercise of power. Defined rules and standards can be used to determine whether power is being used in accordance with or in contradiction to them and whether or not appropriate intervention is required in terms of compliance with existing regulations.
In this context, there is an obligation on the part of the person who has power. He or she must explain him or herself and his or her actions, make the exercise of his or her power comprehensible in the context of existing rules and norms with regard to his or her tasks, duties and intentions, which is expressed by accountability.
These few hints may suffice to make one thing clear. Anyone who advocates transparency, compliance and accountability will not necessarily meet with much approval, and will even have to reckon with not inconsiderable resistance. Transparency, compliance and accountability do not aim to abolish power but to steer it in sensible directions. Nevertheless, these three elements—and this also applies to the church—have a certain discomfort factor for powerful people, be they bishops, cardinals, priests or important lay employees in their entourage.
With these three elements, it is no longer so easy to bask in the glow of a sense of one’s own greatness, to smugly flaunt one’s own power, to claim privileges for oneself without reason and much more besides.
What virtues will the new pope need?
If the candidate to be elected pope is to stand up for transparency, compliance and accountability in the sense of effective and efficient abuse prevention as an expression of the church as a safe space, then much of what is traditionally referred to as the cardinal virtues is needed. With respect to the topic of safeguarding, these can be translated into clear requirements.
Justice. Abuse is a crime that causes considerable, often irreversible damage and wounds in those affected. Perpetrators have in mind only their own advantage, their own needs, although they want to create a completely different impression in the church as its representatives to the public cover up their actions. The new pope must not have the tendency to want to please everyone, or to be conflict-averse in a negative sense so that he cannot deal productively with interpersonal tensions. Instead, the pope must be prepared to take a stand for the sake of the weak and vulnerable and to set boundaries for those who wish them harm or at least something disadvantageous to them.
Bravery. Abuse is diametrically opposed to the church’s image of itself as a sign and instrument of God’s saving work in this world. The scandal of abuse calls its own self-image into question. The next pope must not feel the need to gloss over everything or only perceive reality in excerpts. He should have the ability to face up to the dark sides of the world, of people and sometimes also within the church, especially when it comes to abuse, and to speak openly about it without hiding behind pious phrases. He should be able to deal with resistance and be prepared to tackle necessary changes against abuse despite this resistance.
Moderation. The topic of abuse in particular is highly emotional on all sides, which must be dealt with appropriately. Emotions cannot and must not be repressed, dismissed or trivialized, nor can they be the absolute guideline for any action. The new pope should be aware of the difference between moderation and appeasement, which only hinders meaningful engagement. The next pope should be able to act in a process-oriented manner according to the old principle “suaviter in modo, fortiter in re” (mild in manner, resolute in substance). He should also be able to motivate people when dealing with difficult issues. Stubbornness, which wants everything immediately, should be just as alien to him as indecisiveness, which postpones everything unpleasant to an indefinite future.
Prudence. Consideration of intercultural factors is essential when dealing with the topic of abuse, as decisive parameters in dealing with and understanding abuse (compare, for example, the key concepts of family, sexuality, authority, honor, gender roles, etc.) are highly context-dependent. The pope should be aware of the differences within the universal church, which spans all continents, different countries and sociocultural systems. He should understand what is feasible in a timely manner, tackle what is possible within a clearly defined time frame and change what previously seemed almost unchangeable in the context of abuse prevention—and always through constant dialogue.
The new pope will need to be aware of the resources available within the church in order to tackle necessary changes in terms of safeguarding. If these (such as relevant specialist knowledge) are not sufficient or are not available, the new pontiff should also be open to seeking external help, especially in the investigation and processing of abuse.
Pivots and linchpins
Will these virtues be sufficient in any candidate to emphasize the elements of transparency, compliance and accountability that are so important for safeguarding later in office if he is elected pontiff? Probably not. The pontiff may well be endowed with the highest authority and power; but as an individual, if he does not have the support of the whole people of God, it will be very difficult or even impossible to take safeguarding beyond the status of a mere demand and make it a reality.
The candidate for election as pontiff must therefore also have the ability to win over the people of God—in all its very different parts—to convince it in this respect of the importance of safeguarding. The best way for a person who wants to convince others of the need for safeguarding is, of course, to act accordingly himself—or, to put it very concretely, to implement the central elements of transparency, compliance and accountability in his ministry. In order to be able to do this, in addition to the skills already mentioned in connection with the cardinal virtues, the pope also needs other skills that should be considered as necessary criteria for a possible pope.
What are these skills?
Transparency is based on a fearless willingness to engage in dialogue and discourse; communication that responds to people’s information requirements and information needs in understandable and clear language. It is not about apology, which seeks to persuade the other party to adopt one’s own point of view at all costs by distracting from critical points and exaggerating positive aspects. Rather, it is about the appropriate exchange of arguments and the passing on of information among equals, which values the other person as an equal partner. Communication barriers are avoided as far as possible and are broken down when the opportunity arises.
Compliance requires first and foremost a willingness to be humble, to abide by rules that have been enacted in a formal act and to refrain from making decisions or acting more or less arbitrarily according to “taste.” This applies all the more in cases where acting in accordance with the rules contradicts one’s own ideas and wishes. It is precisely here that discipline and a fundamentally positive understanding of structure and order are required, which, properly understood, are not opponents of the church’s fundamental pastoral endeavors, but rather a means of promoting reliability, consistency, traceability and thus trust, on which pastoral action is built.
Accountability can become a reality only if there is a willingness to take responsibility, that is, a willingness not only to take ownership of a matter, but also to explain and demonstrate what, how, why and for what purpose decisions have been made and what has been done. To prevent answers being given in a vacuum that nobody wants to hear and nobody can understand, it is important to be able to allow oneself to be questioned without immediately blocking such questions as an attack and closing oneself off.
The ability to accept (and follow up on) questions and deal with them appropriately provides the opportunity to critically and productively rethink one’s own thoughts and actions and to adjust them accordingly. The latter in particular requires the ability to recognize one’s own limitations and the capacity for self-criticism. To ensure that all of this does not remain a matter of chance, a clearly structured reporting system is needed that is relevant both within and outside the church. This is a question more than anything of compliance.
Within the church, for example, the college of cardinals could play an important role in the development toward a more synodal church, before which the future pope would report regularly, ask questions and take up suggestions. For this to succeed, however, the future pope must take a special interest in this body, create opportunities for exchange and encounter and convene it regularly and at not too long intervals.
On closer examination of the points just mentioned, one thing stands out. In the context of safeguarding, the three elements of transparency, compliance and accountability may be of particular importance, not least with regard to their guiding function for criteria in the election of the pope: transparency, because avoidance strategies have played a role for far too long and far too often in dealing with the issue of abuse; accountability, in view of the cover-up mechanisms that have been applied far too naturally; and compliance, because of the largely inadequate and inconsistent prosecution of perpetrators of abuse.
Ultimately, however, transparency, compliance and accountability also have a fundamental significance for the life of the church, just like the cardinal virtues mentioned above. In essence, it is also about our own self-image. It is about living together as a community of believers in a credible and convincing way, which the future pope should remind us of again and again with his own words and actions.
