The Behind-the-Scenes Story: Those Conservative Dinners at Cardinal Burke's Home Where They Chose Prevost and Rejected Parolin
As everyone knows, the most absolute and sacred secrecy surrounds the election of the Roman Pontiff. Not only are the cardinal electors, but also the masters of ceremonies, the cooks, and the various craftsmen locked within the Conclave's precincts, all obliged to swear on the Gospels to reveal nothing of what they have seen, heard, or even simply overheard.
The penalty: automatic latae sententiae excommunication. Nevertheless, what occurred before and during the electoral proceedings has always been investigated by journalists, Vaticanists, and historians — very often successfully, as they have managed to piece together the fragments of a complex puzzle thanks to reserved sources, cardinals who were perhaps rather too talkative, monsignors on the rise, and individuals whose vanity was rather too evident.
On the Conclave of May 7–8, 2025, which brought Robert Francis Prevost to the Throne of Peter, much has already been written, and even the daily press has revealed certain details about the four scrutinies that delivered the Church to Leo XIV. Today, after months of reserved meetings and considerable cross-referencing of sources, Il Tempo is in a position to reveal how the decision to cast their votes for Prevost, rather than for Pietro Parolin, was made by the conservative group some time before they entered the Sistine Chapel.
During the preparatory General Congregations, virtually all the purpurates — electors and non-electors alike — took part in meals and reserved meetings. Various groups of eminent figures repeatedly gathered in the trattorias of the Borgo district, openly discussing the forthcoming Conclave over a plate of carbonara or artichokes alla romana. Others, still more cautious and prudent, met in great secrecy in the private apartments of one or another cardinal. In one apartment in particular, however, two dinners proved sufficient to trace the outline of the course the voting would follow in the days that followed. An apartment, moreover, at the center of numerous controversies in recent years — that located at Palazzo Rustucucci, facing the Via della Conciliazione, where the highly influential American cardinal Raymond Leo Burke resides. Pope Francis had wished to strip him of the "cardinal's plate" — that is, the monthly allowance due to cardinals, including those who are retired. Two dinners, the same table companions, with the exception of the principal guests: first Pietro Parolin and then Robert Francis Prevost. Besides the host, present at the first dinner were all the American cardinals, a couple of Germans, a Pole, several Europeans, and the former Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Gerhard Ludwig Müller. The guest of honor that evening was Pietro Parolin, Secretary of State and by universal consensus the candidate most accredited to succeed Bergoglio. His table companions — the Americans Burke, Dolan, and DiNardo in particular — had asked him what he would do as pope to smooth over the liturgical, theological, and moral divisions caused by the pontificate just concluded. According to some of those present at that dinner, when Parolin left the room, one of all the cardinals present pronounced what has the ring of a definitive verdict: "We cannot trust him — we will vote for anyone except Parolin."
Two days later — we are now speaking of the very first days of May 2025 — a virtually identical dinner took place. The same guests, the same questions placed on the table, but this time directed at a very different guest: the American Robert Francis Prevost, Prefect of the Dicastery for Bishops, who had been resident in Rome for only two years and was already well acquainted with the Vatican and curial world. Those who were present have revealed that when the moment came for coffee and digestifs, the die was already cast: the package of votes — between twenty and twenty-five — in the hands of the "conservative" group would flow, from the second scrutiny onward, to Prevost and not to Parolin, given that he had obtained considerably more votes in the first ballot.
The reality is that, the arithmetic having been worked out, it became clear — as has now been established — that following the first scrutiny, Prevost was already the standard-bearer candidate of the conservatives. The Primate of Hungary, Péter Erdő, had come in first in the results. Thereafter, incredibly, Parolin and Prevost found themselves separated from each other by a handful of votes. In the second scrutiny, on the morning of May 8, the picture was already fully drawn: the conservatives flowed toward Prevost — as had been decided at that dinner whose existence we are today revealing exclusively. One question remains — not so much for us as for the conservatives who placed their bets on Prevost: will he honor the commitments made at that dinner?
