John Allen on some recent appointments:

The last two major appointments to the Roman Curia from Benedict XVI went to cardinals from the South: Cardinal Ivan Dias of Bombay, named in May to head the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples, and Cardinal Claudio Hummes of São Paulo, Brazil, appointed in October as prefect of the Congregation for Clergy.

This week came news that Benedict XVI has named several cardinals from the developing world to the powerful Council of Cardinals for the Study of Organizational and Economic Questions of the Apostolic See. They include Wilfrid Fox Napier of South Africa, Juan Luis Cipriani Thorne of Peru, Anthony Olubunmi Okogie of Nigeria, Eusébio Oscar Scheid of Brazil, Gaudencio B. Rosales of the Philippines, and Nicholas Cheong Jinsuk of South Korea. Also appointed were George Pell of Australia and Marc Ouellet of Canada.

The council, which meets twice a year to over the financial affairs of the Vatican, has traditionally been top-heavy with cardinals from affluent Northern dioceses, such as Cardinal Joachim Meisner from Cologne, Germany, and American Cardinals Edward Egan from New York and Roger Mahony from Los Angeles. Informally, the understanding has been that since these are the local churches that kick in the lion’s share of the financing for the Holy See, it’s only fair for them to have some role in overseeing how the money is handled.

The addition of several cardinals from the South means that prelates from the developing world will be much more involved when important dollars-and-cents decisions are made, and as any student of organizational management will tell you, you can determine who counts in an institution by observing who’s at the table when money is on the line.

Students of church politics will note that in these appointments, Benedict XVI turned to several men known for “Ratzingerian” outlooks on theological questions – Pell, Cipriani, Scheid and Oullet would all generally be considered part of the “conservative” wing of the churches they represent.

In the long run, however, the appointments of Feb. 3 may be remembered less for what they reveal about the theological orientation of Catholicism under Benedict, and more as another signpost along the path to leadership that better reflects the church’s sociological composition.