#conclave meta

An infodump meta for the Conclave fandom🖤❤️🖤 and also part of Jolie's Weekly Occasional Lectures on Catholic Church Organisation, Canon Law and Other Things You Never Thought You Would End Up Wanting To Read About Until You Contracted The Old Men Yaoi Bug 😝

(Previous lectures: Part 1: Ranks within the College of Cardinals - What is a Cardinal-Bishop? | Part 2: Christianity in present day Afghanistan | Part 3: What is a Cardinal Major Penitentiary?)

Now also available on AO3 for easier reference.

Today's lecture was inspired by this Tumblr post by @cleanpearlteeth , who comes to the conclusion that the fics presenting Thomas Lawrence as a workaholic who hardly ever leaves his office day and night is incorrect, because the Dean of the College of Cardinals actually doesn’t do shit outside of a conclave.

So, what does a Dean of the College of Cardinals actually do all day when there isn’t a conclave? Does he really work himself to death, or does he put up his feet and takes it easy (and, as cleanpearlteeth very plausibly suggested, develops depression because he feels so useless)?

Short answer: At the time of the LHF's death and the start of the conclave, it was very clearly the latter case for Thomas. But does that mean it has to stay that way after the conclave, too? Not at all. After the conclave, you can basically imagine Thomas's (work)day however you want, or however you need it for your headcanon or fic.

If you need general information on the office of Dean, the historical background, how to become Dean and how to quit being Dean, I recommend you read this excellent (and short) Wikipedia article. If you still have questions, feel free to drop me a line!

To figure out what Thomas's options would be after the conclave, let me talk a bit about the duties of the Dean first. They basically fall into two categories:

A) Duties during a sede vacante period (the more interesting times)

This is the situation that we all know about from the Conclave book and movie. The Dean officiates at the funeral of the late pope. He's basically the public face of the Holy See until a new pope is elected. He summons the conclave for the purposes of electing a new pope, and presides over the daily meetings of the College of Cardinals in advance of the conclave (the so-called General Congregations). The Dean also celebrates the solemn Missa Pro Eligendo Romano Pontifice, or Mass for the Election of the Pope, ahead of the voting, in St. Peter's Basilica (which is actually public and televised IRL and in the Conclave book). He then presides over the conclave itself (if under 80 and thus himself eligible to vote - which hasn't happened IRL since Ratzinger in 2005 because both Deans at the subsequent two conclaves were over 80). This includes both technical/administrative duties like making sure the security measures are in place and everyone has pens and papers to vote with, and spiritual leadership like leading the opening prayers and all the other prescribed solemn rituals. Why am I actually listing all of this? The movie shows you all you need to know. If the Dean participates in the conclave, he asks the pope-elect if he accepts the election, and then asks the new pope what name he wishes to use. If the newly elected pope is not already a bishop (a mere theoretical possibility; this hasn’t occurred since the 14th century or so), the Dean ordains him a bishop. He also goes sneaking around to sniff out secrets, discover scandals and expose his corrupt colleagues, all the while suffering terrible pangs of conscience of his own.

B) Duties during a pontificate (the less interesting times)

When there is a pope, the Dean is significantly less busy in his capacity as Dean. The College meets regularly, once or twice a year on average, to "discuss" church matters with the Pope, to witness the creation (appointment) of new cardinals and to get to know each other better (which is especially helpful for the cardinals who work as archbishops around the world and not in Rome). These meetings are called Consistories, and the Dean probably has a symbolic role in them, but it is apparently so insignificant and unimpactful that I haven’t found any specific information about it.

It’s important to note that a Consistory, although technically the forum where the cardinals "advise" the pope on church politics, does not work like a secular parliamentary debate. It’s extremely formalised, extremely civilised, and the strict hierarchy of the church makes it unlikely that different factions of cardinals would have heated discussions of their varying viewpoints in front of the pope (let alone criticise him openly). So even if the role of the peacemaker/arbiter would technically fall to the Dean in such a case, he's unlikely to have a lot to do there. (It’s fun to imagine this culture maybe changing under Pope Innocent though, and Thomas suddenly having to herd cats in between conclaves, too.)

Minor other tasks of a Dean also include making speeches and addresses to various important church bodies at special events, like at assemblies of bishops or of Curia officials convened by the pope. His function there is to basically say hello to the rest of the church or Vatican on behalf of the cardinals - purely representative. The Dean is also the default celebrant at the funerals of Rome-based Curial cardinals when they die, but this is optional. They can appoint someone else to preside over their funeral in their will or in other private communication if they want to.

So the job of Dean is definitely not a full time job!

(The same, btw, also applies to the Secretary of the College of Cardinals - hi, Ray! - who takes on that role in addition to other duties only when the Dean needs to do any active Deaning; in Ray’s case, according to the book at least, his regular job is to be Secretary of the Dicastery of Bishops, which is a full time job in top level HR, basically.)

So does that mean Thomas will be on holiday the rest of the time?

It is possible to imagine a Dean who does nothing else for the church than that, especially if he’s getting on in years, or if he's too ill to do more. But generally speaking, the church likes to work its people hard, usually well past secular retirement age and often until illness and/or old age literally incapacitate them. The identity of most priests/bishops/cardinals is very tied up with the idea of constant work and service, too, and most of them would feel personally obliged to keep being useful to the church for as long as their physical and mental powers allow. 80 is currently a common cut-off age for Curial positions, but it's by no means fixed. There are members of the Curia who are older than that. It’s more like, before 80, you don’t even think of resigning/retiring unless you’re decrepit and/or involved in coverups of clerical sexual abuse. The times when being a high-ranking prince of the church was a cushy position where you weren't expected to do any work at all except occasionally raise your hand to bless your underlings and the laity are over.

Let's look at the recent RL Deans of the College of Cardinals for an idea what they do/did outside of conclaves and consistories!

Giovanni Batista Re (Dean 2019-present, aged 85-currently 91) no longer held an active senior Curia leadership position at the time when he became Dean at 85 (!), but in addition to his last leadership role as Prefect (head) of the Congregation of Bishops until 2010, he also used to be a member of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples and the Congregation for the Oriental Churches in addition to serving in the Administration of the Patrimony of the Apostolic See until he turned 80.

Angelo Sodano (Dean 2005-2019, then aged 78-92) was an anomaly in that he was both Secretary of State (Aldo Bellini’s position in the Conclave universe) and Dean concurrently for a short time (2005 - 2006). He resigned as Secretary of State at 80 for age reasons, but continued as Dean until age 92, when Pope Francis dismissed him because he‘d covered up sexual abuse.

Joseph Ratzinger (later Pope Benedict XVI, Dean 2002-2005, then aged 75-78) held several Curial and Curia-adjacent positions concurrently with the Deanship. He was Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, President of the Pontifical Biblical Commission and President of the International Theological Commission. He moved on from all of that when he was elected pope in 2005.

Bernardin Gatin (Dean 1993-2002, then aged 71-80) was Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops and President of the Pontifical Commission for Latin America concurrently with his Deanship until he retired from all offices at 80.

Agnelo Rossi (Dean 1986-1993, then aged 73-80) was President of the Administration of the Patrimony of the Apostolic See concurrently with the first half of his Deanship.

Carlo Confalonieri (Dean 1977-1986, then aged 84-93) had resigned from his other Curial posts for reasons of age by the time he became Dean at 84 (!).

The same was the case with Luigi Traglia (Dean 1974-1977, then aged 79-82) and Amleto Giovanni Cicognani (Dean 1972-1973, then aged 89-90).

Eugène-Gabriel-Gervais-Laurent Tisserant (Dean 1951-1972, then aged 67-88) was Secretary of the Congregation for the Oriental Churches and Prefect of the Congregation of Ceremonies until he was just past 80, and additionally Chief Librarian of the Vatican Library and Chief Archivist of the Vatican Secret Archives until a year before his death at 88, all concurrently with his Deanship.

What can we infer from all that for Thomas Lawrence? That throughout modern church history since around WWII, there have been two types of Deans.

Type 1 are the ones who were young enough (i. e., under 80) to be expected to take up the position concurrently with other and more demanding Curial and/or similar senior jobs in Rome (like Ratzinger, Gatin and Tisserant).

Type 2 are the ones who were elected Dean only once their more active careers had already ended due to their advanced age (i. e., the over 80s - like the current incumbent Re, his predecessor Solano, and Confalonieri, Traglia and Cicognani earlier, who are/were all ancient). For this latter type, I feel the position of Dean is supposed to give them a kind of Elder Statesman status, in recognition of their former services - not fully retired, still esteemed and consulted for their decades-long experience, but not expected to work themselves into the ground any more.

How does Thomas Lawrence fit into this pattern? He's canonically a weird hybrid of both types.

In terms of age, the movie character is clearly not supposed to be over 80 (else he couldn't participate in the conclave!), and even his book counterpart Lomeli is "only" 75. But in terms of his church career, that is all behind him already and he is very much an Elder Statesman. Book Lomeli got kicked out of his position as Secretary of State years before the events of the book, when the LHF replaced his predecessor's "old guard" in the Curia with his own confidants, and was then diagnosed with cancer and presumably had to take a break to get treatment as well. Movie Lawrence doesn’t have an official canon biography like that, but going by everything we see of him, it makes sense IMO to assume his and Lomeli's backstory are supposed to be the same or very similar. Both versions of the character even wanted to resign from the position as Dean itself just before the LHF's death. That makes Lawmeli an exception to the rule that you're supposed to keep powering on in the Curia until you’re 80. Whether that's due to his illness or to the LHF not trusting and/or appreciating him enough is a matter of interpretation. But it certainly makes Lawmeli an usually young Dean-only Dean.

So does that mean that he can't spend long days at his desk now, and that every post-canon scenario in which [the prelate of your choice for his boyfriend] walks up behind him, puts his chin on his shoulder and gently whispers "Don't work so hard, Thomas" is nonsense?

By no means. Maybe he wouldn't be up for a major Curial (or similar) position other than Dean any more (like being head of a Dicastery/Congregation). But wouldn't the new pontificate have the potential to rejuvenate and reinvigorate both his failing health and his lapsed faith, and make him ready and able to continue supporting the new pope and the church in some more active capacity again? It’s not a necessary conclusion, but certainly a plausible one. We're now definitely in the territory of interpretation and also speculation. What happens to Thomas after the conclave? We just don’t know, but there are plenty of paths still open to him if he wants to get active again.

So if you want him to stay in Rome and in the Vatican and do more than just be Dean, what kind of work could he do?

The work of most of the Dicasteries of the Curia (the equivalent of secular government ministers) is collaborative, as indicated by their former name, "Congregation" (meaning "to flock together" in latin). They have an appointed head, often called the Prefect, but below the Prefect they consist of various subsections and committees and commissions, and someone needs to sit on all those, too. The same is true of all the other major institutions that make up the Holy See. They all need supervisory committees and advisors, too. Sometimes the pope sets up special, temporary commissions for specific purposes outside of the usual structure of the Curia, too, and he needs people to staff those as well.

And as anyone who has ever sat on any committee can attest, there are ways and ways of doing that. You can use the time to doze, but you can also take it very seriously. And which type would Thomas be? Exactly. Glad we agree.

If you're looking for inspiration for your fic or your HC, look up the extensive list of Vatican institutions on Wikipedia and take your pick! Alternatively, he could also go back to lecturing on Canon Law at one of the Pontifical Universities, like Lomeli canonically did at an earlier point in his career. Or he could go and get actually involved in his suburbicarian diocese of Ostia, if you want him to explore his parish priest qualities. Or if none of that tickles your fancy, make something up! Invent a Special Papal Commission on Rooting Out Corruption in the Curia or whatever and make Thomas its head or one of its members.

an analysis of the ashtray in Bellini's suite, the chess match in progress, shot compositions and adding my interpretation that Robert Harris uses queer-coded phrasing to imply an intimate connection between them beyond what we see on the surface.

Grab your tinfoil zucchetti. But not really. Jokes aside, I don’t want to “prove” anything, just to point out the potential significance of this and how it relates to the two characters in question. This is based on Robert Harris' phrasings in his book, classic queer-coding in literature, the long-lasting history of gay men in the Catholic church and shot composition analysis. My credentials are a summer course on film at NYU, former member of the chess club at school and being gay with an autistic brain.

This post was what made me notice the ashtray, credit to OP for pointing it out. I thought it was a cool detail. When editing a random clip, I noticed how the ashtray is then revealed to us in this scene. This is the first shot from the angle where we see Bellini sitting next to the chessboard and you can see Thomas is covering the rest of the table:

It is only when Thomas moves that we see the ashtray:

[this covering/uncovering technique is also seen when they all turn to look at Agnes in the cafeteria and Tedesco is blocking Benítez sitting in the back until he walks and we can see him]

We then get another angle of Bellini and the table and this shot includes the chair on the other side of the table that we also couldn’t see in the first shot:

Talking to my tiktok pal @tomwambsgansdarkglasses about this, I took a closer look at the chessboard and wondered: Did Bellini memorise and preserve the last chess match against his friend the late pope, keeping it there as a reminder? Has Bellini been playing chess against himself during the conclave? Why is the ashtray there and what does it represent? Does the chessboard represent the late pope/the papacy/Bellini’s inner turmoil? The table features quite a lot in this sequence (covered, uncovered, stared at by Bellini at one point, next to him in the wider shot and blurred in the end). Here’s a clip:

I. The chess match

I returned to the first scene where we see the last match against the late pope and I don’t think this is the same match preserved. There’s enough to assume this is a different match. Different pieces have been taken. Not to mention how impractical it would be to preserve the last match and take it with him for the conclave. Considering what Bellini says to Lawrence in the beginning, we can also assume the late pope was winning, playing with the white pieces and Bellini playing with the black pieces.

II. Is Bellini playing against himself?

It’s not uncommon for chess aficionados to play against themselves so that was my first assumption. Of course the ashtray may be just a meaningless addition by the set design, same as the extra chair and he was playing both sides. But if we assume the ashtray was put there for a reason, taking into account the table features in nearly every shot of the entire sequence, there’s a chance the implication is that he isn’t playing against himself. Another thing my pal pointed out was: Why would he be placing the pieces taken differently, some organised, the others dropped? And more, wouldn’t it be more practical to be placing the taken pieces on the side so he doesn’t have to reach for the other side of the table? Wouldn’t it be easier to remove the ashtray to get more space? The chessboard has already been introduced to us as an accessory associated with Bellini’s chess interest/his grief/friendship with the late pope/papacy. The chessboard could be on the table by itself and it would make no difference. There’s no need for the chair on the other side too. We can see this is a suite and a bigger room than Lawrence’s through other elements in this sequence. Why the ashtray?

III. The ashtray

Around 10 minutes before this scene takes place, we see Bellini, Lawrence and Sabbadin in the stairwells, where we see Sabbadin smoking. This is his fourth scene (auditorium, bus, breakfast, stairwells) and the first in which he’s smoking. So far we’d seen Bellini and Sabbadin often side by side and surrounded by others but never in an intimate setting just the two of them. To me this can be interpreted as a glimpse into all that we haven’t seen, those two characters being closer than what we had previously seen. There’s an ongoing match happening, perhaps started when the conclave began, perhaps because Bellini relaxes through playing. Where did they go after the auditorium? Where were they before knocking on Lawrence’s door before the stairwells? If they’ve been playing chess since the conclave began, they might have been in each other’s company, just the two of them, every night in Bellini’s suite. There’s intimacy in that. While we see it’s common for the cardinals to be visiting each other in their rooms for canvassing or socialising, this is a level beyond that once you consider Bellini’s queer-coding and the subtle implication of intimacy this brings, using their dynamic in the book as foundation. In a story about the Catholic church, widely known for having a gay subculture and being a common destination for gay men, it seems like an oversight not to make a single nod to homosexuality and queer-coding, in my view. This piece of visual subtext seems to mirror the queer-coded phrasing chosen by Robert Harris in the book to describe their dynamic and the characters, which we’ll revisit soon.

Moreover, if he’s been playing against Sabbadin, he’s playing with the white pieces and winning. Sabbadin, sitting on the side of the ashtray, is playing with the black pieces (emo “undertaker” core). Bellini’s taken pieces are all organised on his side. The few white pieces taken aren’t equally organised, some are dropped near the ashtray.

If the chessboard represents Bellini’s inner turmoil, the late pope, the papacy, the grief, wanting and not wanting, the ashtray represents Sabbadin and his intimate connection to the man himself and the papacy, since he has an interest in becoming Secretary of State in a potential Bellini papacy. The chessboard and the ashtray, side by side. The potential relationship between the two as an added factor in understanding both characters. When Bellini looks at the table, frustrated and not knowing what to do about the simony discovery and what this will mean for the election, he looks at the chessboard and the ashtray. Sabbadin’s point of view is one he has been taking into account throughout the entire narrative and stands next to his inner turmoil and his grief. We had seen that proximity but here we see a potential glimpse into exactly how close their relationship has been through some visual subtext of queerness and intimacy. Watching the film after having read the book, it seems like a visual way of adapting dialogue and descriptions from the book that didn’t make into the movie.

— Further queer-coding in the book (or why I interpret them as being together, in the book at least and don’t think that’s any reach)

I had pointed out before the moments between them in the book are more personal than professional. I like this one where Bellini snaps and brings up his father + first name:

And my favourite being the line that shows not only that Sabbadin has been to Bellini’s suite but also that he chooses to point this out to Lomeli when there was no reason to do so and he could have simply said “I have a suite” or “some of us have suites”:

The book also brings the information Bellini had been Archbishop of Milan before him and of course Sabbadin is introduced in the book as Bellini’s praetorian guard, which, again, is very unique wording:

And Harris doubles down on the description by making Lomeli say in the next page:

In conclusion, I just find this all very interesting and my intention is to explore this visual detail in the cinematography with my interpretation of the queer-coding of Bellini/Sabbadin as a couple in Harris’ book. Thanks to OP for pointing out the ashtray in the first place, thanks to @ tomwambsgansdarkglasses for going through this with me at 1am last night.

But on the other hand, all of that drama and symbolism affords them a way to speak really openly with each other, if they choose to. I mean, in what other context could somebody say "search your heart, and then tell me it isn't so" and be completely serious?

To say "I had the temerity to tell you to search your own heart..." as part of an apology to a friend without a hint of irony?

It's so performative, but also strangely sincere on another level. I would need a lot more words to ask even a good friend to sit on my bed and hold my hand while I have a breakdown over my shattered dreams than "Will you pray with me?"

lawrence's thing about being clocked by the old pope as a manager and not a shepherd, about being taken as inoffensive and unambitious and politically-unmotivated by most anyone at the beginning of the conclave. is that.

okay, he's a manager, he's the backstage admin making sure the curia goes on, he's a paper pusher. but you can't convince me this guy didn't paper push a whole lot of insane papers.

you don't end up with a reputation for dogged integrity, easily forgotten influence and selfless reliability as the second most influential person in the vatican like that by being boring or normal. or at least boring in a normal way.

innocent xiv in his second first day of office being given the super secret cardinal cvs and nodding along to everything, with a few surprises. until he gets to t. lawrence, dean of the college. and it's just. this gigantic fold out of stapled documents that goes over his knees and keeps unrolling on the floor.

he's merely a manager, alright. it's just that he's been managing literally everything, step by step, all the way up the ladder.

"Lomeli was pleased to see the bins of rubbish had been removed, then irritated by his pleasure—it was another trivial detail to disrupt his meditation."

he wants to be in god's presence all the time but he's firmly stranded in the real world. the people he admires most, he admires for the spirituality he considers lacking within himself. benitez is the obvious example, but bellini also has that aura:

"He could tell that Bellini’s mind had elevated itself to some higher plane and was no longer registering—as Lomeli’s did—all those trivial details that crowded out the presence of God"

so when sabbadin said "we serve an ideal. we cannot always be ideal," lomeli, who has "servus fidelis" on his coat of arms, is obscurely upset, because he thinks service isn't enough to be holy.

"ambition, the moth of holiness" but lomeli's ambition is for holiness itself. this is so intriguing to me, because it's clear that it's something he had before and lost, just like he lost the illusion of his own heroism.

his crisis of faith boils down to "what was all of it for?" aka "what ideal were you serving?" but because lomeli wants to be the ideal, it sounds a lot like "who are you? what are you doing?"

The Swiss Guards has yet to learn how to deal with an able bodied pope who can disappear and reappear without them even noticing. “Good Morning, Fredrick” one guard hears the Pope address him personally. He had no idea His Holiness was even in the room, let alone that he knew his name!

Vincent, who has spent his life working in refugee camps and women’s shelters, so his plate is always near empty because he keeps piling his own food onto other’s.

Tedesco admires this side of him but will never say so out loud. It has become a bonding experience for them both — theological discussions while sharing food.

The sisters of St Vincent de Paul was quicker on the uptake, and has since reimagined the meal courses to ensure The Holy Father eats enough of his own food too. Soup is commonly on the menus in the vatican city.

Vincent, who has buried many of his people, washed their blood of his hands, and helped clean up the crime scenes. He is not afraid of blood.

A sick Cardinal had a nosebleed, and without hesitation Pope Innocent XIV began gently dabbing at the stained cassock with his handkerchief. “There there, we shall get the blood out soon enough. If we’re quick, it won’t even stain your dress.”

Vincent, who’s used to fall asleep anywhere.

The driver parked the car. He was not entirely sure what to do about the sleeping holy father in the back. The Swiss Guard sitting beside him, looked equally confused. A knock on the window woke Innocent XIV up. “Oh, are we there yet? Good morning Cardinal, I’m afraid I fell asleep on the ride here. Do excuse any sleeplines on my face.”

🤍 Vincent Benitez 🤍

Posting this separately cause dammit, I researched/wrote like a thousand words on this ridiculous character's background, I want to make sure it's accessible to other people who want to use some of it in their fics without having to read a whole back-and-forth meta conversation first!

This is all FROM THE BOOK, so technically applies only to Jacopo Lomeli and not Thomas Lawrence. That said, nothing that they say in the movie DISPROVES any of it, and given how closely the movie otherwise adheres to the book, I tend to assume that anywhere they don't explicitly change something, the assumption is it should be the same. THAT SAID, I do want to call out that movie heavily implies that the late Holy Father reigned for significantly longer than he did in the book, because in the movie, Benítez offered his resignation "in his late thirties" (to, presumably, the same Pope who just died), while in the book, he only offered to resign in January of the same year that the Pope died. While Benítez's age is never clearly established in the movie, him being younger than mid-50s would be remarkable and worthy of notice, which means that the late Holy Father had to have reigned for at least 15 years, and more probably 20+ (compare this to the book, in which he was elected after Ratzinger's retirement, and so presumably in 2013, and so likely died after only ~6-10 years in office, the book being placed in ~2021, give or take a couple years).

It's also worth noting that I remember someone pointing out at some point (but can't find it now, of course) that Thomas and Aldo have matching rings of office in the movie, which imply they were appointed by the same Pope (which almost certainly wouldn't have been the case in the book.). Anyway, those changes in general would have a lot more impact on Bellini's career than Lomeli/Lawrence's, but could still have had an effect on the landscape, so all the information below is probably but not canon for Lawrence.

Finally, before we dive in, I want to call out that we are never given any information at all on Lomeli's backstory before he joined the Church, which is an interesting and clearly deliberate character choice. We have significantly more early and familial backstory on Tedesco and Tremblay, who are relatively minor characters, than on our protagonist! We don't know what his parents did, if he had siblings, or even what region of Italy he comes from. The only history we have on him is his professional career—Lomeli has no identity outside the Church.

So, in the book, Lomeli's career went:

Seminary in Genoa & University (50s–60s) During the preparations for the Conclave, Lomeli makes a comment that he was a boy in seminary in Genoa during the Conclave of 1958, and not yet ordained by the Conclave of 1963. This means that he must have attended a minor seminary, which you can enter as early as 13 or 14 (the absolute earliest the book can be set is 2019, as there are references to past events in 2017 & 2018. Which means that since Lomeli is 75 when the book starts, he can't have been born before 1943). He would have then graduated from minor to major seminary, and after being ordained, would have studied at a Pontifical University—quite likely the Gregorian, that being the most prestigious, the one that most of the Curia went to, and the one with the largest program in canon law.

Professor of Canon Law at the Gregorian (70s) — Priest It's stated that Lomeli was a professor of canon law—we don't know what university but as stated above, it's likely it would have been the Gregorian. Era is not explicitly stated, but given the time hints above, it seems probable that Lomeli would have been ordained in the late 60s and made professor in the 70s.

Various diplomatic posts (80s) — Bishop This is the part that we have the least evidence on, but we know that that Lomeli never served in a "ordinary parish" and it's incredibly unlikely that he would have achieved his next position without some lower level diplomatic experience. He also would have been promoted to be a titular archbishop for his next position (it's been traditional since 1978), so it's likely he was made a bishop before that.

Permanent Observer to the UN (90s) — Archbishop of Aquileia The book says that he was "Apostolic Nuncio in the United States." However, there are two other references to him having served in New York, which means that he couldn't have been the Nuncio to the US, who serves in Washington DC. The only other possibility is that he was the Permanent Observer to the United Nations, who is also an Apostolic Nuncio, and is traditionally made a titular Archbishop. I went through all the Permanent Observers through history, and none of them held the rank of cardinal until after leaving the UN, so it's also almost certain he wasn't named cardinal until after this. The book specifically says he held this post in the 90s.

Secretary for Relations with States (00s) — Cardinal-Priest One of things I think Harris does most amazingly in the book is fit in these little bits of world- and character-building so smoothly you barely notice them. In this case, the part I skated over was: He picked up his pectoral cross from the nightstand and kissed it. John Paul II had presented him in person with the cross to mark his recall from New York to Rome to serve as Secretary for Relations with Foreign States. The Pope’s Parkinsonism had been terribly advanced by then; his hands had shaken so much as he tried to hand it over, it had dropped on the floor. So, from this paragraph we know that he was promoted directly from his post to the UN to this higher post in the Secretariat of State. It's a job that (scrolling through the various priests who have held it) is usually accompanied by a rise to the cardinalate, and we know that Lomeli had to have been named a cardinal by John Paul II, because he remembers Ratzinger's "shy smile" at the moment his vote tally passed two-thirds, which means Lomeli must have been in the room during the voting. So it probably happened here (also consistent with him still wearing the same pectoral cross). We also know this had to have happened between 2001 (John Paul II diagnosed with Parkinson's) and 2005 (John Paul II's death). This position is often called the Vatican's "Foreign Minister" and there are only two positions higher than it in the Secretariat of State, those being the Secretary of State himself, and the Substitute for General Affairs.

Secretary of State (10s) — Cardinal-Bishop And so, now here's the big question. Was Lomeli made Secretary of State under Ratzinger, or under the Late Holy Father? For the life of me, I cannot tell from the book. The only real info we get is: When the traditionalists had taken control of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in the nineties, he had kept his head down and got on with his work as Papal Nuncio in the United States. Twenty years later, when the late Holy Father had decided to clear out the old guard and had asked him to step down as Secretary of State, he had nevertheless served him loyally in the lesser role of dean. So, we know that Lomeli was counted as part of the "old guard"—but given that it's clear that he'd already been high in the Curia under John Paul II, this makes sense regardless of whether he served as Ratzinger's Secretary of State, as well. And we know that the late Holy Father asked him to step down at some point in the 2010s—that being twenty years later than the 90s—but if we're assuming that the Nameless Pope in the book was elected the same year as Francis (e.g., 2013), and that the Conclave is set sometime post 2019 (the only hard "modern" date we have in the book is that Vincent was named Archbishop of Kabul in 2018, which is implied to have been fairly recent), then this... also doesn't give us any new information.

However, we are also told that Lomeli was only Secretary of State "briefly," which means that he couldn't have possibly been Secretary of State for Ratzinger's entire 8-year pontificate, or even probably for most of it. Since he was diagnosed with cancer "a few years ago," him being Secretary of State only briefly also implies that him being asked to resign probably wasn't related to his cancer—I say this only because I've seen that headcanon a lot in fanfiction.

So I can see two scenarios that both make an equal amount of sense with the information we're giving:

Ratzinger's previous Secretary of State stepped down or died in the last year of his pontificate, when his own health was already very poor, and he appointed Lomeli as a reliable servant who wouldn't make any waves while "managing" (heh) his retirement and the transition from his pontificate to the next. Lomeli then hung on for several months into the next Pope's administration before being asked to resign (this is actually very common—there hasn't actually been a single instance in the last sixty years where the Vatican Secretary of State wasn't at least temporarily reappointed by the next Pope, even if it was only for a few months).

The Late Holy Father decided to get rid of Ratzinger's Secretary of State as quickly as possible, but didn't want to completely overhaul the entire dicastery, and so appointed Lomeli, as the highest-ranking liberal-leaning centrist in the Curia at that time, as his Secretary of State to provide some institutional continuity. He then asked him to step down a year or two later and put Bellini in his place, hoping that would enable him to make greater progressive strides.

(After I asked for more of a joking "In this essay I will" post about Lawrence/Lomeli and the Holy Spirit)