By Kundai Marunya

THE possibility of a black Pope emerging as the next leader of the Catholic Church has ignited fi erce debate among theologians, historians, and social commentators. At a time when the world is increasingly advocating for racial equality, the election of a black Pontiff could be seen as a historic step towards inclusivity. Africa is home to over 281 million Catholics, a number that is rapidly growing when everywhere else the number is plummeting.

This represents 20 percent of the global number of Catholics. The continent has long been a vital yet underrepresented part of the Church. However, beneath the surface of this seemingly progressive move lies a more troubling question: Is the Vatican’s sudden openness to a black Pope a genuine shift, or is it a strategic maneouvre to advance controversial agendas under the guise of racial progress? To understand the implications of a black Pope, we must fi rst confront the Catholic Church’s deeply problematic history with black people. The Church was a central institution in justifying and perpetuating the transatlantic slave trade. Papal bulls such as Dum Diversas (1452) and Romanus Pontifex (1455) authorised the enslavement of Africans, declaring non-Christians as enemies of the faith who could be rightfully conquered and enslaved. Dum Diversas was a papal bull issued by Pope Nicholas V in 1452, authorising King Afonso V of Portugal to invade, subjugate, and enslave “Saracens, pagans, and other unbelievers” in Africa.

This bull is considered a key document in the ‘Doctrine of Discovery’ a set of legal principles that legitimised European colonisation and exploitation of non-Christian lands and people. Romanus Pontifex translates to ‘The Roman Pontiff ’ and is the name of a series of papal bulls, particularly one issued by Pope Nicholas V in 1455. This specifi c bull, Romanus Pontifex (1455), is signifi cant for its role in justifying Portuguese colonisation and trade in Africa, and its implications for the enslavement of non-Christian peoples.

Missionaries worked hand-in-hand with European colonial powers, facilitating the extraction of Africa’s wealth while suppressing indigenous cultures. The Vatican’s vast riches — its gold-laden basilicas, priceless artworks, and sprawling real estate — were built, in part, on the suff ering of enslaved Africans and the plunder of their lands. Given this history, why would the Church now consider a black Pope? Is it an act of reconciliation, or is it a carefully calculated rebranding eff ort? The Catholic Church is losing infl uence in Europe and North America, where secularism and scandals have eroded trust.

Meanwhile, Africa remains a stronghold of fervent believers. A black Pope could thus appease followers on the continent. Several black cardinals have been discussed as potential papal candidates, though the secrecy of the conclave makes a prediction diffi cult. Among the most prominent are Cardinal Peter Turkson of Ghana, a moderate Vatican insider; Cardinal Robert Sarah of Guinea, a staunch traditionalist; and Cardinal Fridolin Ambongo of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), known for his criticism of Western exploitation in Africa. It is important to note that DRC has the highest number of Catholics in Africa, which is over 55 million, half of the country’s population. If a black Pope is chosen, will he be a transformative leader or a controlled fi gurehead considering that the Vatican’s hierarchy remains overwhelmingly white and Eurocentric.

The real power lies with the Roman Curia — the Church’s administrative body — which has historically resisted radical change. This means that a black Pope may fi nd himself constrained, forced to uphold policies designed by the same institution that once sanctioned the enslavement of his ancestors. One of the most contentious issues he is likely to face is the Church’s current stance on homosexuality. Unprecedented moves already made by the late Pope Francis towards LGBTQ+ inclusion, approving blessings for same-sex couples in 2023 have already sparked outrage among African bishops. In Nigeria, Uganda, and Kenya, Catholic leaders have openly defi ed the Vatican, declaring that such blessings will not be permitted in their dioceses.

The Catholic Church in Zimbabwe offi cially opposes same-sex marriage and civil unions. The Zimbabwe Catholic Bishops’ Conference has specifi cally cautioned against any actions that may be perceived as blessing same-sex unions, citing concerns about confusion, scandal, and the law of the land. This raises a critical question: Could a black Pope be used to legitimise the normalisation of homosexuality in Africa? If a black man — seen as a representative of African values — endorses LGBTQ+ acceptance, would it not be more eff ective than if a white Pope imposed it? History shows that black fi gures have often been co-opted to enforce policies that ultimately harm their own people. Consider Barack Obama, the fi rst Black US president, whose administration orchestrated the NATO-led destruction of Libya in 2011.

Under Muammar Gaddafi , Libya had been one of Africa’s most prosperous nations, off ering free healthcare, education, and housing for its citizens. Newly-weds received fi nancial support, and unemployed graduates were given stipends matching their qualifi cations. Obama’s intervention reduced Libya to a failed state, triggering a migrant crisis and destabilising the entire Sahel region. His legacy in Africa is a stark reminder that symbolic representation does not always equate to genuine advocacy for black interests. Similarly, a black Pope who promotes homosexuality in Africa could face accusations of being a Vatican puppet, undermining the very cultures he is supposed to represent.

The West’s aggressive push for LGBTQ+ rights in Africa coincides with declining birthrates in Europe and America. Is this a genuine human rights campaign, or is it part of a broader depopulation agenda? With artifi cial intelligence and automation poised to replace human labour, one must question whether the erosion of traditional family structures serves elite interests. The 16th-century seer Nostradamus allegedly predicted that a black Pope would bring chaos to the Catholic Church. While interpretations vary, some believe this refers to a Pontiff whose reign triggers deep divisions.

If a black Pope fully embraces reforms such as same-sex blessings or female priesthood — it could provoke a schism, particularly in Africa, where Christianity is growing rapidly. The Bible explicitly condemns homosexuality (Leviticus 18:22, Romans 1:26-27), and many African Christians view LGBTQ+ activism as a neo-colonial imposition. If the Vatican forces this agenda through a black Pope, it risks alienating millions of faithful, potentially fracturing the Church beyond repair. A black Pope could be a monumental step towards justice — but only if it comes with genuine repentance for the Church’s crimes.

The Vatican must acknowledge its role in slavery, colonialism, and ongoing economic exploitation. It must return stolen artifacts, support reparations, and divest from systems that keep Africa impoverished. However, if the election of a black Pope is merely a performative gesture — a way to push Western liberal values while maintaining the status quo — then it will be another cruel deception. Black Catholics deserve more than symbolism; they deserve a Church that truly atones for its past and empowers their future.