Since Pope Leo XIV was elected last year, 14 cardinals have turned 80, and aging out of eligibility to participate in the next papal conclave.
In fact, the number of cardinal electors around the world has fallen to 121, just one above the limit set by norms promulgated by Pope St. John Paul II for the election of a pope. And several more cardinals are set to age out of their conclave voting rights in the next few months.
While the number of 120 is in theory the upper limit of cardinal electors in the College of Cardinals, recent popes — especially Francis — have tended to treat it more like an ideal than an absolute norm, often exceeding the limit in their appointment of cardinals, especially when aiming to offset the imminent prospect of cardinals aging out.
Despite the current number of cardinal electors, observers in Rome are growing in the expectation that Leo might soon appoint new cardinals — that alongside an ordinary consistory of the college of cardinals already set for late June, the pope will also convoke an extraordinary consistory, meant the creation of new cardinals.
And with Leo developing a reputation in his first year as pope for quietly resetting things in Rome, especially in the relationship between the pope and the curia, there is considerable speculation about who will make up the first group of cardinals he will create.
—
Pope Francis had a tendency to subvert the traditions surrounding the appointment of new cardinals. He didn’t appoint cardinals from traditionally “cardinatial” sees such as Paris, Dublin or Milan, preferring countries that had never had a cardinal before, such as Mongolia, Tonga, Laos, Algeria, and Morocco.
And in countries that usually had a single cardinal, he appointed cardinals from dioceses other than the country’s largest or primatial sees, such as in Ecuador and Tanzania, and even an auxiliary bishops in dioceses where the bishop or archbishop went without a red hat.
Meanwhile, in Rome, Francis elevated curial undersecretaries to the cardinatial, such as Cardinal Fabio Baggio, C.S., while leaving some prefects without the red hat — including Archbishop Filippo Iannone, O. Carm., then prefect of the Dicastery for Legislative Texts.
Now, there is considerable expectation over how Pope Leo might depart from his predecessor’s tendency to shake up the College of Cardinals. In the immediate term, much will depend on whether Leo opts for a small first consistory, creating only a handful of new cardinals to maintain the optimal number of 120, or a larger one that preemptively replaces those set to age out in the next year or two.
If Pope Leo decides to make appointments in June to “replace” those cardinals within a year of retirement, he’d be likely to make between eight and 12 cardinals this year.
But if the pope he wishes to anticipate the number of cardinals set to retire within two years, a consistory this year could create 20 or even 25 new voting-age cardinals.
So, who are the potential new cardinals?
The curia
While he may feign surprise when the announcement is made, Archbishop Filippo Iannone is widely expected to be created a cardinal at the next extraordinary consistory, whenever it may come, given his senior curial role as prefect of the Dicastery for the Bishops.
Two other Leonine appointments will be especially telling. Many expect that the Australian Archbishop Anthony Randazzo, recently appointed as prefect of the Dicastery for Legislative Texts to replace Iannone, will also be made a cardinal.
However, it is worth noting some of his predecessors weren’t created cardinals during their terms as prefect of the same dicastery. For example, Iannone wasn’t made a cardinal while serving in the dicastery, while Cardinal Vincenzo Fagiolo, was only made a cardinal by John Paul II upon his retirement in 1994 after a short four-year term.
On the other hand, Cardinals Francesco Coccopalmiero and Julián Herranz were created cardinals while serving in their positions.
Recently-appointed papal almoner Archbishop Luis Marín de San Martín, OSA, is in a somewhat similar position. His immediate predecessor, Cardinal Konrad Krajewski, was a cardinal, but Krajewski was the first papal almoner to be given a red hat while serving in the position, which under Francis’ curial reforms, grew to become an expanded Dicastery for the Service of Charity. Therefore, it might make sense for the prefect to be a cardinal.
Perhaps just as significantly, Archbishop Marín de San Martín is considered to be one of Pope Leo’s closest collaborators, as they worked together in Rome during then-Fr. Prevost’s term as the superior of the Augustinians, and have known each other for three decades.
Considering that there are several senior curial offices with prefects past retirement age, there is also the possibility that the pope will appoint another new prefect before his first slate of red hats is announced, and that might prefect might also be included in a consistory list.
‘Cardinatial sees’
When a cardinal retires from a diocesan see but remains of voting age, his successor is not customarily made a cardinal until the predecessor turns 80.
If it is observed, that custom makes Archbishop Ronald Hicks of New York unlikely to become a cardinal until his predecessor, Cardinal Timothy Dolan turns 80 in four years.
But the custom is not always followed: Pope Francis made then-Archbishop Frank Leo a cardinal despite the fact that his predecessor as Archbishop of Toronto, Cardinal Thomas Collins, was still of voting age.
There are a number of archbishops from traditionally cardinatial sees in which their predecessor is over 80 years old or will turn 80 in the next two years. Several are widely expected to become cardinals in Leo’s first or second extraordinary consistory:
Archbishop Ignatius Kaigama, who succeeded Cardinal John Onaiyekan as Archbishop of Abuja.
Archbishop John Rodrigues, who succeeded Cardinal Oswald Gracias as Archbishop of Bombay.
Archbishop Richard Henning, who succeeded Cardinal Seán Patrick O’Malley, OFM Cap. as Archbishop of Boston.
Archbishop Jorge García Cuerva, who succeeded Cardinal Mauro Poli as Archbishop of Buenos Aires.
Archbishop Philip Anyolo, who succeeded Cardinal John Nyue as Archbishop of Nairobi.
Archbishop Peter Chung Soon-taick, OCD, who succeeded Cardinal Andrew Yeom Soo-Jung as Archbishop of Seoul.
Archbishop Josef Grünwild, who succeeded Cardinal Christoph Schönborn as Archbishop of Vienna.
Archbishop Richard Moth, who succeeded Cardinal Vincent Nichols as Archbishop of Westminster.
But there are other bishops in typically cardinatial sees who are not as likely to become cardinals as those figures.
For example, Archbishop Marco Tasca, OFM Cap., succeeded Cardinal Angelo Bagnasco as Archbishop of Genoa, and Archbishop Gherardo Gambelli, who succeeded Cardinal Giuseppe Betori as Archbishop of Florence.
Since Saint Paul VI’s pontificate, there has been much discussion about the number of Italian cardinals. For most of the Church’s history, a significant majority of cardinals came from Italy but the percentage fell significantly after Saint Paul VI’s reform of the College of Cardinals, which set the number of cardinals to 120. Before the reform, there wasn’t a specific number of cardinals but always hovered around 80.
The number of Italian cardinals fell even more during Francis’ pontificate. There were 28 Italian cardinal electors in the conclave that chose Pope Francis, almost a fourth of the cardinal electors. However, in the 2025 conclave there were 17 Italian cardinals, around 12% of the cardinal electors, a significant decrease.
However, even after Francis halved the percentage of Italian cardinals, Italy is still the country with the most cardinal electors.
Much of the decrease in Italian cardinals came from Francis’ decision not to make cardinals in places like Milan, Venice, or Genoa, which had been led by cardinals for centuries. Francis instead created new cardinals in smaller dioceses like Agrigento, Como, L’Aquila or Siena.
Therefore, while many in the Italian Church argue that some Italian archbishops in traditionally cardinatial sees deserve to be created cardinals, it is not possible to do so without increasing the proportion of Italian cardinals.
So, while Tasca and Gambelli would be leading candidates to receive the red hat, it is yet unclear what Leo will decide to do with the number of Italian cardinals and the shifting Italian ecclesiastical map.
Archbishop Luc Terlinden, who succeeded Cardinal Jozef de Kezel as Archbishop of Mechelen-Brussels, is in a similar position. As the Church in the Low Countries becomes smaller, with fewer Catholics and vocations, it’s unclear whether the pope will want to appoint a third cardinal from Belgium, the Netherlands, or Luxembourg.
If the pope is interested in increasing representation in fast-growing regions while reducing the traditional weight of areas where the Church is shrinking - as Pope Francis effectively did by passing over Ireland for the red hat, for example - the Low Countries could be next.
Thus, it’s possible that Terlinden could be made to wait until Cardinal Wim Eijk of Utrecht turns 80 before receiving a red hat.
Archbishop Enrique Benavent, meanwhile, succeeded Cardinal Antonio Cañizares as Archbishop of Valencia. But while Benavent’s three immediate predecessors were all cardinals, only one of them, Cardinal Agustín García-Gasco, was made a cardinal as Archbishop of Valencia. Cardinal Carlos Osoro was created a cardinal later as Archbishop of Madrid and Cañizares was appointed Archbishop of Valencia when he was already a cardinal.
Following Cañizares and Osoro’s 80th birthdays, and with Cardinal Juan José Omella of Barcelona nearing 80, Spain will likely get one or two new cardinals in the near future, with one almost certainly being Omella’s successor in Barcelona.
Spain has a significant number of dioceses that have had cardinals in its history aside from Madrid and Barcelona, with Valladolid, Toledo, Sevilla, and Valencia leading the list. Any of those dioceses could plausibly be in the running for a new cardinal.
In Latin America, Archbishop Raúl Biord succeeded Cardinal Baltazar Porras as Archbishop of Caracas, but his tenure there has been short and marked by controversy. Several sources in Caracas and the Secretariat of State have told The Pillar that it is possible that Pope Leo XIV might opt to overlook Biord in future consistories.
Still, Venezuela has had at least one diocesan bishop as a cardinal since before the Second Vatican Council, and the two most likely options now are Archbishop José Luis Azuaje of Maracaibo and Archbishop Jesús González de Zárate of Valencia.
Azuaje is the better known option in Rome, and several cardinals and curial officials have told The Pillar that they would like to see him receive the red hat after his service in the Synod of the Bishops and as vice-president of both the Latin American and Caribbean Episcopal Council and the Venezuelan bishops’ conference.
González de Zárate is himself the president of the Venezuelan bishops’ conference and is widely appreciated for his service during a complicated time in Venezuela.
Last, Cardinal José Luiz Lacunza of the Diocese of David in Panama was one of the typically “peripheral” cardinals created by Francis because he served in a small diocese in Panama. But his retirement has meant that Central America only has two cardinals: Cardinal Álvaro Ramazzani of Huehuetenango, Guatemala, and Cardinal Leopoldo Brenes of Managua, Nicaragua.
Leo could therefore create an additional cardinal from one of the region’s metropolitan sees.
The un-snubs?
Several archbishops from typically cardinatial sees were notably passed over by Pope Francis.
Many interpreted this move as part of a desire to make more cardinals where the Church is growing, rather than declining. The late pope’s decision not to appoint a cardinal in Dublin is perhaps the most iconic example of that possibility.
In other cases, the apparent snub was rather less clearly explained, as was the case of the Archdiocese of Paris, and in some instances, many presumed the archbishop in question was too inclined to theological conservatism for Francis’ liking, such as the case of Archbishop Anthony Fisher, OP, of Sydney.
Considering that Pope Leo has pushed for normalization in the Church, it is quite likely that at least some cardinals will come from the cardinatial sees that were overlooked by Pope Francis.
A leading candidate could be Archbishop Laurent Ulrich of Paris. While he was never made a cardinal by Francis, he is also widely considered a theological moderate, so making him a cardinal would be less likely to be perceived as a pointed break with Francis, compared to someone like, for example, Archbishop José Gómez of Los Angeles.
The same could be said of creating cardinals like Archbishop Mario Delpini of Milan or Francesco Moraglia of Venice. However, both dioceses have been widely rumored to be possible destinations for Italian bishops who are already cardinals — even including an eventual possible homecoming for the Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem, Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa, as improbable as that might strike readers outside of Rome.
But if traditionally cardinatial sees in Italy are earmarked, even tentatively, for current cardinals, it makes it all the more unlikely that Pope Leo will give Delpini or Moraglia the red hat.
There’s also the lesser known case of Archbishop Jude Thaddaeus Ruwa’ichi, OFM Cap., Archbishop of Dar-Es-Salaam, Tanzania. While few would think of Tanzania as a country of red hats, Ruwa’ichi’s two immediate predecessors were cardinals, and Tanzania is undergoing a vocations boom, with some of the largest seminaries in Africa, which could turn him into a leading candidate for a red hat.
The dark horses
Of course, it might be that Pope Leo will want to continue Francis’ general trend of making the College of Cardinals less western and more global.
Several countries with large or growing Catholic populations are underrepresented in the college, among them the Philippines, Mexico, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Nigeria, Peru, Tanzania and Colombia.
It’s quite likely that the pope could make new cardinals from at least some of those countries, especially in Africa, even if there is no popular consensus on who exactly he might choose.
While African representation grew under Francis, much of that growth came from unexpected places. For example, he appointed as cardinals two European bishops serving in northern Africa, where the Church barely exists, while not selecting bishops from sub-Saharan countries in which the Church is growing.
If the pope wants to make a strong statement with regards to the controversial German Synodal Way, he might also wish to give the red hat to bishops who have opposed the initiative, such as Bishop Bertram Maier of Augsburg or Bishop Stefan Oster, SDB of Passau.
However, the president of the German bishops’ conference, Bishop Heiner Wilmer of Münster has also been rumored as a potential candidate for the cardinalate as a balancing act if Oster or Maier also receive the red hat.
Last, Leo could still make some surprising cardinal appointments — much as his predecessor did.
For example, he could give the red hat to Nicaraguan Bishop Rolando Álvarez, exiled in Rome after spending over a year in prison for his opposition to the Ortega regime or Major Archbishop Sviatoslav Shevchuk, the leader of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church. Either of those appointments would be dramatic statements with potentially serious diplomatic consequences, but could provide a powerful signal by Leo about his approach to global conflict zones.
Meanwhile, a more personal pick from the pope could prove to be Bishop Erik Varden of Trondheim, who recently preached the spiritual exercises of the Roman curia.
The Trappist Bishop of Trondheim has quietly become a global figure for his spirituality, teaching, and writing and is at the center of what many consider to be one of the most dynamic episcopal conferences in the West.