The surprise success of the film Conclave, released last October, has taken on new significance in recent days. Following the death of Pope Francis on April 21, interest in the movie has surged, with streaming rates reportedly tripling since the announcement of the pope’s passing. Directed by Edward Berger and based on a 2016 novel, Conclave tells the story of the cardinals electing a new pope — but Catholics should be aware: while visually compelling, the film is riddled with serious inaccuracies about the sacred process of a conclave.
According to Matthew Bunson, Church expert and editorial director for EWTN News, the film creates a “spiritual wasteland” by depicting the College of Cardinals as a group of “cliquey, petty, ambitious, and drably ideological” figures. Bunson explained to CNA that the film’s cardinals are “cartoon characters of what cardinals — and I know many — actually talk about,” lacking any “serious theological or philosophical spiritual depth.” While the actors bring skill to their performances, he noted, the writing reduces them to “banal” and “uninteresting” caricatures.
Bishop Robert Barron of the Diocese of Winona-Rochester offered a similarly sharp critique. Writing on social media, Barron quipped, “If you are interested in a film about the Catholic Church that could have been written by the editorial board of the New York Times, this is your movie.” He added, “The hierarchy of the Church is a hotbed of ambition, corruption, and desperate egotism … Conservatives are xenophobic extremists and the liberals are self-important schemers.”
One particular fictional twist has drawn the strongest condemnation: Conclave’s climax reveals that a biological woman — disguised as a male cardinal — is elected pope. This outcome, while shocking on screen, is entirely impossible within the Catholic Church. As seminary rector Father Carter Griffin told CNA, “A stable, secure, and well-ordered sexual identity is a necessary condition for priestly formation and ordination.” Griffin emphasized that “a biological female identifying as a male would not, in fact, be a male — and thus would be ineligible for the priesthood.”
Moreover, Griffin explained, the priesthood reflects Christ’s spousal relationship with the Church: “Throughout his priestly ministry, but especially at Mass, the priest stands in the place of Christ who, as a bridegroom, lays down his life for his bride, the Church.” Ordaining women, he said, would “obscure that priestly paternity as well as the femininity of the bride of Christ.”
While Conclave stumbles heavily on spiritual matters, it does manage to depict some technical elements of the papal election with reasonable accuracy. According to Bunson, the movie correctly shows the camerlengo breaking the deceased pope’s “ring of the fisherman” — an important ritual symbolizing the end of a pontificate. The film also portrays the traditional conclave process within a recreated Sistine Chapel, showing the secret ballot votes, black and white smoke, and the two-thirds requirement for a valid election.
Still, even in its accurate moments, the movie trims or alters procedures for dramatic effect. For example, Bunson noted that the film conflates the roles of the camerlengo and the dean of the College of Cardinals, likely to give actor Ralph Fiennes’ character more screen time.
Another major error involves the fictional Cardinal Benítez, who claims to have been made a cardinal in pectore — in secret. In real life, as Bunson pointed out, “a cardinal created ‘in pectore’ cannot take part in a conclave unless the pope makes the cardinal’s name public prior to his passing.” Thus, Benítez would not have been eligible to vote, let alone be elected.
In summary, while Conclave offers a gripping political drama, it misses the essential heart of a real papal election: the prayerful invocation of the Holy Spirit to guide the Church. As Bunson put it, if the filmmakers had focused on “an authentic, Catholic conclave,” the result “might have been truly historic and superb.”
