Nicholas VI Exit
Nicholas VI died without warning on the 25th of June 1915, a few weeks after the fall of the last rebel strongholds during the civil war. Deemed a heart attack by the official channels, more modern scholarship has raised the suggestion that foul play may have been involved in the pontiff's demise but no definitive proof was found and the holy see has so far denied a toxicological analysis of the body.
Nicholas' pontificate is considered by most to be the worst in the modern Church for failures both internal and external with only a sparse few revisionist scholars choosing to praise his industrial policies and commitment to internal cohesion. This, however, is a fringe view and most often touted by extremists and restorationists in particular outside of Italy.
Nicholas' rule represented, in a way, the continuation of Innocent's policy of apathy towards reform but soured that attitude into full-on reactionary policy contrary to any changes, no matter the cost.
The pope's grandiose declarations of Greater Italy and national strength were shattered early on in his reign after the disaster that was the French War. The alliance with Germany that was supposed to guarantee Italian safety was the beginning of the end for Nicholas as the French use of chemical weapons and a general complacency from the Italian general staff caused a full collapse of the Alpine line.
As with most authoritarians, this military defeat shattered the veneer of strength that Nicholas had put on and resulted in a significant increase in the number of strikes and protests across Italy while more clandestine channels planned for a general uprising. The opening moves of the civil war were bungled by the rebels as the soldier's revolt of September 1911 deprived the revolutionaries of the element of surprise and permitted for a papal retaliation.
The civil war is a well-known horror, not least because its veterans lived on well into the second half of the century and gave voice to the atrocities they witnessed both in and out of battle. As previously mentioned, hundreds of thousands were killed or displaced during the conflict itself and several documents are preserved with plans by Nicholas to undertake reprisals against the populations that had resisted the papal advance with the greatest vigor.
While these measures were not taken due to the pope's death, Nicholas crossed another line with his use of ecclesiastical power as a bludgeon for his political gains. Previous popes had managed to maintain a plausible separation between their roles as temporal and spiritual leaders but, with his excommunication of the socialists, Nicholas harkened back to a more ancient pontificate, unafraid to mix and merge the pope's multiple roles. The Council of Sant'Angelo had a mixed reception because, on the one hand, it confirmed the wisdom of Callixtus' denial of papal infallibility but, on the other hand, it proved that the new conciliarism could be manipulated in dire enough circumstances. This issue would have to be resolved in the next crucial years of the papacy.
The last split that Nicholas caused was that between the mainstream Catholic Church and the Sedevacantist movement. Though originally born with the aim of selecting a new pope in opposition to Nicholas VI, the opposition consistory convened in Paris failed to settle on a single candidate and broke down into separate camps locked in a battle over legitimacy. A number of these groups later rejoined the Church during the reign of subsequent popes but others remained in schism and even elected their own local antipopes such as pope Thomas in France and Pope Mark II in the Italian expatriate community of Argentina.
From the personal diaries of Cardinal Giovanni Trinca
Thursday 8th of July 1915
I thought that his papacy would never end. That he would stop only when everyone who opposed him had been killed. But he waited a moment too long. After a life in hell for the last years, we have sent Nicholas there to answer for his crimes at last. However, he was not the only guilty party, he has stained every one of our souls together with his and we will have much to answer for when the time comes. I pray that God will grant me some small mercy for my attempts, but there is precious little to recommend me.
That we are even here holding an election seems absurd. I understand that the Church must go on but who should follow such a monster? The papacy is irrevocably tainted by its worldly pursuits and this possession must be permanently exorcised to allow for both Italy and the Church to survive.
In my weakness, I had not the heart to advertise my candidacy and now I find myself far below Zambrano with my chances of bearing the cross becoming slimmer and slimmer with each cast of the ballots. I think I would be the right man at this time, to inaugurate my election with the restructuring of Italy to forever avoid another civil war. Another Celestine to make the great refusal not through cowardice but through humility.
But I must gain those votes, and who will I be able to turn to my side? Whatever may happen, I must ensure the separation of bishop and sovereign happens regardless of the person in charge. I have to talk to Zambrano, if he cannot be convinced to endorse me then he must be convinced to yield the throne of Italy for the common good. The chaos of the last years did not allow me to know his spirit but I have to hope that there is some virtue in him and that he may see the light at least on this one matter.
May God forgive us even if we certainly do not deserve his mercy.
From the personal diaries of Cardinal Ugolino Longo
Friday 9th of July 1915
The two main sides haven't moved much and I don't blame them. After the recent chaos, we are entrusted with a choice that could either doom or rebuild Italy. We are broken at home with vast divisions between the rebels who have been cowed and those who exacerbated their conditions in the first place; while abroad we are seen as a broken nation incapable of properly asserting control over its territory. It is no secret that the French and Austrians were behind the rebels with weapons and finances and just lie in wait for a chance to splinter Italy in the name of "stability".
I myself am conflicted in my choice between the main candidates as they both have elements to recommend and condemn them. Cardinal Trinca is well known and well respected by everyone thanks to his quarter of a century of service but is seen by many as a radical. I don't doubt his abilities and his commitment to the betterment of the nation and would even support some of his more controversial policies but I fear that he might not be the correct pope for this moment in history. He would have been the right candidate in the last election but after all, that has happened we need a great unifier who will mend bridges and not tear them down and I fear that Trinca would not have the tact necessary.
On the other hand, Cardinal Zambrano has been in the Curia for less time and is tainted by his elevation by Nicholas but he has more of a traditional mindset and showed great promise during the internal reform of a few years ago. He was tasked with tearing down an old system and consolidating the nation and he did it without excessive resistance so that we may now have stronger tools to deal with regional dissent. Zambrano has also expressed his desire for unification with the Italians still living outside our country and I believe that this would be a good angle for the next years. If we can be shown to be strong and unified with a worthy cause to fight for, the international community will be much calmer with regard to our stability in the future.
Everything considered, I fear that Zambrano might be the more prudent choice, though I wish Trinca a long and healthy life to take up the mantle the next time. As for myself, I will do my duty to ensure a safer future for all.
From the personal diaries of Cardinal Luca Zambrano
Saturday 10th of July 1915
We are still here in a longwinded attempt to decide who will be burdened with Nicholas' mess. I would expect to be infuriated by the lack of action but I can only empathize with the desire to make the correct choice after the last one was so destructive. I had those doubts myself when the conclave was called and spent many sleepless nights wondering who is the correct choice for the occasion.
Like many of my fellow cardinals, I first looked to Trinca as an experienced man close to the interests of the people we just massacred. He could build a bridge where it was once torn down and be trusted to do so with the dedication that he has shown in his long career. But I was forced to change my mind when I thought of how Trinca would be interpreted by those who are more attached to tradition, and I saw many problems. In his zeal to fix the papacy, he would risk the alienation of large fractions of the Church and we could not survive another schism. We must do as much as we can to reincorporate the sedevacantists while we halt the birth of new breakoffs.
It is with these thoughts in mind that I found myself thrust into the lead of the election. I did not expect this outpouring of support but I find myself obliged to accept. Once we exclude Trinca, the other cardinals are either tainted by their actions during the civil war or unqualified for the task.
Though I do not wish to take on this burden, I have to believe that God has chosen me as his tool for the reconstruction of his Church. I need to make it clear to everyone that I will do everything that I can to be a conciliatory pope and embrace the many different groups that are within the Church or wish to be within it. I will have to remind the world that a pope should be a source of hope for Catholics and that they should trust him to work for the good of mankind.
But I will also have to be sovereign of Italy, a task incompatible with goodwill towards man. I need to find how to separate the necessities of politics with the purity of religion and do so without bringing harm to these two elements that have acted as one for over a millennium.
I pray that God may guide me to save us all, for this is a task beyond mere man.
