The recent death of Pope Francis marks a significant moment for the Catholic Church and global political discourse.
As the first Jesuit and first Latin American pontiff, Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s papacy was notable not only for its theological nuances but also for its political symbolism. His tenure reflected broader shifts in the global balance of religious and moral authority from Europe to the so-called Global South.
The passing of a pope always provokes global reactions—not merely within the ecclesiastical domain but also among political leaders, commentators, and the public. Francis was perceived by many not only as a religious figure but as a prominent participant in world affairs.
His perceived proximity to certain political currents and his ambivalent stance on some key global issues have shaped a complex legacy that will dominate discussions about the future direction of the Catholic Church.
One of the most contested aspects of Francis’s pontificate, particularly from a Ukrainian perspective, was his position on the Russian-Ukrainian war. Critics have pointed to his reluctance to clearly identify Russia as the aggressor and his emphasis on dialogue with Vladimir Putin.
Despite visiting several conflict zones in his later years, Francis notably did not travel to Ukraine. His approach was seen by many Ukrainians as a moral failure, especially given his reputation for advocating for the downtrodden.
This perceived neutrality was compounded by parallels drawn between Francis’s position and that of political leaders such as US President Donald Trump. Both figures have emphasised negotiating directly with Russia’s leadership, often without publicly acknowledging the asymmetry of the conflict. This shared perspective is rooted less in theological belief and more in a broader worldview that regards Russia as a defender of traditional values in opposition to what is often portrayed as the moral relativism of the West.
The Vatican’s historical tendency to engage with traditionalist governments, regardless of ideology, has been a constant in modern history. The Lateran Treaty of 1929, which established the Vatican as a sovereign entity, was negotiated with Benito Mussolini’s fascist regime. That legacy remains relevant, as the Church continues to navigate its position amid a global rise in populism and authoritarian governance.
Francis’s election in 2013 was itself a reflection of strategic shifts within the Church. The move away from a Eurocentric hierarchy, which had dominated for centuries, acknowledged the demographic reality that the majority of practising Catholics now reside in Latin America, Africa, and parts of Asia. His papacy represented a conscious pivot to regions where Catholicism remains a living faith rather than a cultural artefact.
As the Church considers its future leadership, several potential successors have emerged. These include Cardinal Pietro Parolin, the Vatican Secretary of State, who oversaw the controversial agreement with China regarding episcopal appointments; Cardinal Peter Erdő of Hungary, closely aligned with Prime Minister Viktor Orbán and representing a more conservative strand of Catholicism; and Cardinal Luis Antonio Tagle of the Philippines, seen as a more liberal contender. The eventual outcome of the next conclave will be a critical indicator of whether the Church seeks to continue Francis’s global outreach or reorient itself toward traditionalist or Eurocentric values.
The decision will also likely reflect the Church’s ongoing internal debate over how to remain politically relevant without compromising its spiritual mission. The Catholic Church has long functioned not only as a religious institution but also as a geopolitical actor. In this capacity, Francis’s papacy was characterised by a tension between a desire for reform and the realities of navigating global political currents.
The final symbolic gesture of Francis’s pontificate—the meeting with US Vice President JD Vance, a newly converted Catholic with right-wing populist affiliations—underscores this dynamic. It highlighted the Pope’s willingness to engage with political figures who see in the Church a vessel for their vision of societal order. Whether that vision aligns with the Church’s broader pastoral mission remains a subject of debate.
The contradictions in Francis’s record—his emphasis on humility and poverty, contrasted with what many perceive as political ambivalence—will continue to shape his posthumous image. For many Catholics, he was a reformer and a symbol of moral leadership. For others, particularly in Eastern Europe, his reluctance to confront Russian aggression has cast a long shadow over his legacy.
As the Vatican prepares for a new chapter, the memory of Francis will likely serve as a reference point for debates over the Church’s role in the 21st century. His papacy, like those of John Paul II and Benedict XVI before him, was as much about interpreting contemporary history as shaping it. The direction chosen by the next conclave will indicate not only theological priorities but also the Church’s stance on global power and morality in a time of political fragmentation.
In this regard, Pope Francis’s legacy is likely to remain divisive. His pastoral simplicity and global outreach stand in contrast with a complex geopolitical positioning that left many questions unanswered. Yet, his tenure undeniably marked a pivotal transformation in the Catholic Church’s orientation—from European centre to global periphery—and that shift will define the Church’s trajectory in the years ahead.
Read also:
Pope Francis and Vice President Vance in Unlikely Easter Meeting at the Vatican
