From Re to Tagle: an era ends, and Leo shows his independence

Some transitions change a name on an organizational chart. Others seem to shift an entire era.

The departure of Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, 92, as dean of the College of Cardinals belongs to the second category. He is succeeded by Luis Antonio Tagle, 69, a Filipino cardinal and pro-prefect of the Dicastery for Evangelization.

The change was announced Oct. 9, after Pope Leo XIV approved the election held the previous day by the cardinals of the order of bishops.

Re becomes dean emeritus (retaining his suburbicarian see of Sabina-Poggio Mirteto), and his retirement symbolizes the end of an era.

Tagle was not unilaterally chosen by the Pope to remove Re. He was elected by his peers and confirmed by Leo XIV.

As per Canon 352 of the Code of Canon Law, the dean is elected specifically by the cardinals of the Order of Cardinal Bishops — the Church’s highest-ranking cardinal tier — with the pope’s approval required to finalize it.

The procedure matters because it prevents an institutional transition from being turned into a palace maneuver. But papal endorsement matters, too: Leo accepts this transition and places the seal of his authority on it.

The symbolic message — in a Church built on symbolism — is powerful.

A veteran Italian cardinal, identified with the Roman Curia’s long institutional memory, hands over the baton to an Asian cardinal associated with evangelization.

The generation, the place of origin and the perspective from which the Church is viewed are all changing.

Tagle is only the second non-European ever to hold the post; the only other was Cardinal Bernardin Gantin of Benin, who served from 1993 to 2002.

Re and the memory of the institution

Re represents a Rome that knows names before they appear in official bulletins, remembers conversations others have forgotten and understands that, in such an ancient institution, information can carry as much weight as an official position.

His time in the Secretariat of State, where he served as substitute from 1989 to 2000, placed him at the heart of the administration during the pontificate of John Paul II. He became dean in 2020 and remained in the position during the transition from Francis to Leo XIV.

He was not a secondary figure: following the death of the Argentine pope, he presided over the general congregations preceding the 2025 conclave, although he could not participate in the conclave itself because he was over 80.

Under the rules governing conclaves (the apostolic constitution Universi Dominici Gregis), a dean who cannot take part because of age is replaced in the Sistine Chapel by the sub-dean — currently Cardinal Leonardo Sandri, who holds that position alongside Re’s deanship.

His career helps explain his influence. More than half a century of uninterrupted influence over the entire Curial apparatus. Institutional longevity, the ability to engage with others and knowledge of its mechanisms do not amount to absolute control, but they come close.

Re embodies a form of power that does not always need to be displayed. It is the power of continuity, relationships, accumulated experience and knowing how things are done, undone — or brought to a halt.

The old maxim, “Popes come and go; the Curia remains,” expresses this tension.

The pontiff can set a direction, but he needs an administration to put it into practice. And every administration faces the temptation to turn its own preservation into an end in itself, something evident in the Church’s Curial apparatus.

When a pope directs most of his leadership outward, as was the case with John Paul II, those who administer the institution internally acquire enormous responsibility because they filter information, set priorities, process decisions and facilitate or hinder access to the pontiff.

That is where the Curial risk lies. Not necessarily in a permanent conspiracy, but in something more ordinary and persistent: procedures replacing priorities, internal balances of power outweighing pastoral needs, and governance looking first to its own corridors rather than to the communities it is meant to serve.

This is not about denying the need for the Curia. A worldwide Church needs coordination, competence and institutional memory. It is about asking who serves whom.

Francis and Re: a more complex relationship than confrontation

Francis, the Argentine pope, wanted to reform the Church, but that does not mean he treated the veteran cardinal solely as a representative of a power that needed to be controlled.

Francis himself approved Re’s election as dean in 2020 and extended his term in 2025. That fact requires us to acknowledge a relationship of institutional trust, even if it does not rule out differences of opinion.

Notably, it was Francis’s own 2019 motu proprio that ended the dean’s traditionally lifetime tenure, capping it at a five-year term renewable once — the same rule that now applies to Tagle.

Re, therefore, was not merely a symbol of resistance. He was also a man to whom different pontiffs entrusted responsibilities. That is precisely why his departure carries such resonance.

Tagle: a different generation, a different center of gravity

The successor introduces a visible change. Tagle becomes the first Asian to lead the College of Cardinals as dean.

His Filipino origins and his responsibility at the Dicastery for Evangelization shift the focus toward a Church whose universality can no longer be confused with its Roman administration.

His arrival also increases his visibility in relation to a future conclave, but greater visibility does not amount to a guaranteed candidacy or a succession plan.

Tagle was already widely considered “papabile” — a plausible future pope — heading into the 2025 conclave that elected Leo XIV, and commentators have noted the historical echo of Joseph Ratzinger, who served as dean before his own election as Benedict XVI in 2005.

Nor does the deanship make its holder the head of Vatican government. It is a responsibility connected to the College of Cardinals and particularly significant during periods of transition.

Re’s experience in 2025 demonstrates this: he was able to preside over the preparatory meetings, but not the conclave itself, because of his age.

Tagle, by contrast, will not turn 80 until June 2037, meaning that if the Holy See falls vacant before then, he would be eligible to preside over that conclave himself.

It is important, therefore, not to confuse the symbolic significance of this transition with a complete redistribution of power.

A pope who does not want to be managed?

The confirmation of Tagle allows for another interpretation: Leo XIV accepts that a central figure of Roman continuity hands over the baton to a cardinal from a different generation and background, who is responsible for the Dicastery for Evangelization.

It is an unmistakable sign of renewal and of the Pope’s indirect control over the Curial apparatus.

This is Leo XIV’s message: do not govern against the Curia as a matter of principle, but do not become trapped within it either. Make use of its experience without submitting to its inertia. Recognize its service without treating its internal balances of power as untouchable.

The end of an era, not the end of the problem

Re leaves the deanship with the title of dean emeritus and a long institutional history behind him. That history does not disappear, but one chapter has ended.

Replacing a 92-year-old Italian dean with a 69-year-old Filipino makes it clear that even the longest-standing continuities eventually come to an end, and that the worldwide Church can recognize itself in faces different from those that occupied the center for so long.

Will Leo XIV succeed in preventing the institutional apparatus from constraining his pontificate? There is no answer yet. Tagle’s election is a signal, not a guarantee.

What is at stake is something deeper than a change of leadership: that the Curia remember that it does not exist to perpetuate itself, but to serve. That its memory does not become a lock. That its competence does not turn into tutelage. And that the Pope can govern a universal Church without Rome ultimately reducing it to the size of its corridors and its thirst for power.

This is a translated and edited version of the column that first appeared on Religion Digital and has been republished with permission by Global Catholic.