Here’s a rewritten and expanded version of the article, aiming for a minimum of 600 words and formatted with Markdown:

Did Macron Attempt to Influence the Papal Election? A Rumor Under Scrutiny

For the past week, whispers and speculation have circulated, questioning whether the President of the French Republic attempted to influence the selection of the next Pope, specifically by directing the votes of the French cardinals. The basis for this rumor appears to stem from a luncheon held at the Villa Bonaparte, the French Embassy near the Holy See, following the funeral of Pope Francis. This event, brought to light and detailed by Le Figaro on April 27th, has become the focal point of allegations suggesting undue influence. The supposed objective of President Macron? To prevent the election of Cardinal Robert Sarah of Guinea, deemed too conservative for his liking.

However, a careful examination of the timeline reveals how this rumor has gained traction through a combination of conjecture, unverified information, and convenient amalgams. The initial spark seems to have originated from social media, specifically the platform X (formerly Twitter).

According to the rumor mill, "Cardinal Erdö (Archbishop of Budapest) reports contacts between Emmanuel Macron and the five French cardinals to block the path of Cardinal Sarah." This claim was reportedly posted on X by a user named Stornsen. Crucially, this tweet appeared on April 22nd at 11:41 AM, a mere twenty-four hours after the announcement of Pope Francis’s death. At that point, the date of the funeral hadn’t even been formally set, let alone the luncheon at the Villa Bonaparte. This immediately raises questions about the source’s knowledge and the speed at which the rumor was propagating.

The crux of the issue lies in the temporal discrepancy. How could Macron have hosted a lunch, intended to sway the French cardinals after the funeral, if the funeral date itself was still undetermined? Furthermore, the assertion that Cardinal Erdö made such a statement lacks concrete evidence. The tweet by "Stornsen" remains the primary, and arguably only, source cited in many online discussions. No reputable news organization has independently verified Cardinal Erdö’s alleged claim, and neither the French Presidency nor the Vatican has issued any official statement on the matter.

The rumor’s narrative hinges on the perceived political leanings of Cardinal Sarah. He is widely regarded as a traditionalist within the Catholic Church, holding conservative views on a range of social and theological issues. This perception, coupled with Macron’s publicly stated commitment to progressive values, forms the basis for the argument that Macron would actively seek to prevent Sarah’s election.

However, the reality of papal elections is far more complex than simply pitting progressive forces against conservative ones. The process of selecting a new Pope, known as a conclave, is shrouded in secrecy and involves intricate political maneuvering within the College of Cardinals. Cardinals from across the globe, representing diverse theological perspectives and national interests, participate in the voting. It’s highly unlikely that any single head of state, regardless of their political influence, could unilaterally dictate the outcome of such a complex and decentralized process.

Furthermore, attempting to overtly influence the papal election would be a highly risky and potentially damaging move for any political leader. It would likely be viewed as an infringement on the sovereignty of the Holy See and could provoke a strong backlash from the Catholic Church and its followers worldwide. The history of relations between France and the Vatican is long and complex, marked by periods of cooperation and conflict. While French presidents have historically maintained a close relationship with the papacy, they have generally avoided direct interference in internal Church affairs.

The claim that Macron specifically targeted Cardinal Sarah also raises questions. While Sarah is certainly a prominent figure within the Church, he is just one of many potential candidates for the papacy. It seems unlikely that Macron would focus solely on preventing the election of a single individual, especially given the unpredictable nature of the conclave process. The focus on Sarah suggests a pre-existing narrative about the election and the desire to fit the facts to that pre-existing narrative.

The Villa Bonaparte luncheon, while confirmed to have taken place, may have been misinterpreted. Such gatherings are common occurrences in diplomatic circles, providing opportunities for informal discussions and relationship-building. It’s possible that the topic of the papal succession was discussed during the luncheon, but there’s no evidence to suggest that Macron explicitly instructed the French cardinals on how to vote. The Le Figaro article, while reporting on the event, did not explicitly state that Macron attempted to influence the cardinals’ votes. It merely reported on the existence of the lunch and the speculation surrounding its purpose.

In conclusion, the rumor that President Macron attempted to influence the papal election by directing the votes of the French cardinals appears to be based on a weak foundation of evidence. It relies heavily on unverified social media posts, conjecture about Macron’s political motivations, and a misinterpretation of a diplomatic event. While the possibility of subtle diplomatic maneuvering cannot be entirely ruled out, the claim of direct interference seems highly improbable, particularly given the complexities of the papal election process and the potential political risks involved. The "scandal," therefore, appears to be built more on speculation and pre-conceived notions than on concrete evidence. Further investigation and verification would be needed to substantiate these claims.