Thursday, May 8, 2025

Pope Leo XIV

Let us pray for our new pope, Leo XIV.  His choices to take a traditional name and to appear in traditional papal garb (as Benedict XVI did and Francis did not) are small but encouraging signs of a man who subordinates himself to the papal office and understands the importance of continuity with the past.

Posted by at

38 comments:

  1. ArtIntoNihonjinMay 8, 2025 at 12:32 PM

    I'm so happy an Englishman (one from Chicago too) took the Papacy.

    ReplyDelete
  2. FredMay 8, 2025 at 12:51 PM

    From your keyboard to God's eyes.

    ReplyDelete
  3. AnonymousMay 8, 2025 at 1:00 PM

    We finally have an American pope. I think Slate magazine summed it up pretty well. Probably a center-left pope.
    https://slate.com/life/2025/05/pope-new-robert-prevost-leo-xiv-conclave.html

    ReplyDelete
  4. AnonymousMay 8, 2025 at 1:21 PM

    Amen!

    ReplyDelete
  5. NormMay 8, 2025 at 1:43 PM

    Let us indeed pray for Pope Leo XIV

    I wonder if, given his familiarity with the American Church, if we might just see Bishop Barron raised to Cardinal and perhaps even given some important role like being the Doctrinal Head give Bishop Barron's academic background. They are both Chicago natives, so it does seem like a distinct possibility. Bishop Barron has excellent speaking qualities as well.

    And if that's the case given that Bishop Barron is familiar with Prof's work and even recommended, perhaps Prof could be appointed as a consultant.

    Let us hope and pray.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Miguel CervantesMay 8, 2025 at 7:44 PM

      Oh, I doubt whether that would be a good choice. Bishop Barron is an adept of Rene Girad and is as traditional as Kylie Minogue.

      Delete
    2. NormMay 8, 2025 at 11:28 PM

      Miguel

      It is just important that on matters of doctrine that he maintain what the Church has always taught.

      Pope Benedict XVI even as Perfect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith was always sympathetic to Balthasar. As Pope he even promoted him.

      What strikes me about Bishop Barron was that when the death penalty teaching was changed in the catechism. Bishop Barron made it a point not to use the language of intrinsically evil. If he were to do something like that as head of the congregation for the doctrine of Faith (clarify that the death penalty isn't intrinsically evil), that itself would be such a huge and important clarification.

      He could also urge more orthodox readings of some controversial documents like Amoris Laetitia.

      Bishop Barron is familiar with a lot of the main figures in the Thomistic Revival.

      Three of those figures are very dear to me, i.e Dr Feser, Fr Thomas Joseph White, Dr Matthew Levering.

      I am sure that if Bishop Barron were given such a role, atleast one of them would be appointed to some significant position.





      Delete
    3. AnonymousMay 9, 2025 at 12:56 PM

      I actually heard conservative Bishop Barron speak well of our new pope.
      https://www.foxnews.com/video/6372537664112

      Delete
    4. NormMay 9, 2025 at 1:34 PM

      Ofcourse there are other important things apart from doctrinal clarity. But doctrinal clarity at this juncture should be a priority.

      Delete
    5. Miguel CervantesMay 9, 2025 at 8:06 PM

      Unfortunately, Barron's fascination with Girard, Balthasar etc., compromises his orthodoxy. Vatican II was the playground of two kinds of modernism; "low Church" modernism like Kung's, and "High Church" modernism represented by Ratzinger. The latter kind was precisely the one Pius XII had in mind in Mediator Dei, when he condemned the "false mysticism creeping" into the Church. It was no secret that he had de Lubac in mind. This was not the Thomist revival.

      It's not surprising that Guenonean esoterists like Peter Kwasniewsky, Morello and lazu Kmita also place themselves in the de Lubac/Balthasar line, and claim to be Thomist. But they also try (with a straight face) to squeeze the silliest neo-platonism, Eckhart, Boehme, Tomberg, Guenon etc., into "Thomism". Everybody wants to be a Thomist these days, it seems. No. Barron is just more fare from the failed 1960s.
      Were the pre-Vatican II manuals boring? Only to people who were bored with sana doctrina.

      Delete
    6. AnonymousMay 10, 2025 at 3:05 AM

      What exactly is the issue with Girard?

      Delete
    7. English CatholicMay 10, 2025 at 7:25 AM

      > It's not surprising that Guenonean esoterists like Peter Kwasniewsky, Morello and lazu Kmita also place themselves in the de Lubac/Balthasar line, and claim to be Thomist.

      Can you explain a bit more? I haven't heard of Iazu Kmita, but the other two you mentioned I thought were orthodox. I suppose Morello talks about magic-y stuff a bit, but I don't detect any of the Lubac-ist or Balthasarian heresies in him. He emphasizes that one is not solely a Catholic by what one believes, but also by what one does, but nothing wrong with that. Kwasniewski, even less so. He seems thoroughly orthodox.

      Certainly there are some trads who de-emphasize St. Thomas and push Kantian personalist philosophy (the von Hildebrands are the most obvious example; Alice explicitly advocates for substance dualism and plurality of substantial form), but I wouldn't put the names you mention in that camp.

      Can you give any examples?

      Delete
    8. Casual ThomistMay 10, 2025 at 5:43 PM

      Mysterium Dei:
      162. "From what We have already explained, Venerable Brethren, it is perfectly clear how much modern writers are wanting in the genuine and true liturgical spirit who, deceived by the illusion of a higher mysticism, dare to assert that attention should be paid not to the historic Christ but to a "pneumatic" or glorified Christ. They do not hesitate to assert that a change has taken place in the piety of the faithful by dethroning, as it were, Christ from His position; since they say that the glorified Christ, who liveth and reigneth forever and sitteth at the right hand of the Father, has been overshadowed and in His place has been substituted that Christ who lived on earth. For this reason, some have gone so far as to want to remove from the churches images of the divine Redeemer suffering on the cross."

      How does this have anything to do with the Christology of Balthasar or the Desiderium Naturale of De Lubac?

      Delete
    9. English CatholicMay 11, 2025 at 11:10 AM

      This doesn't directly relate to Mediator Dei, but here was the argument that convinced me Balthasar was almost certainly a heretic:

      https://unamsanctamcatholicam.blogspot.com/2012/02/heresies-of-balthasar.html

      Delete
    10. Miguel CervantesMay 11, 2025 at 10:23 PM

      Girard approaches religion like a secular anthropologist. Sacrifice was something invented by simians on the way to becoming human. He claims St Paul's epistle to the Hebrews should not be in the Bible because of its references to sacrifice. This just for starters. Girard Catholic is not.
      Kwasniewski maintains that the Church needs to be "exorcised' from the sprit of Vatican One. It's spirit may be worse for the Church than that of Vatican II, he says. He claims the 'Gallican sprit" was the traditional European one, and demands, in the name of Vatican II and that of traditional gallican Europe, that the bishops have an autonomous ordinary jurisdiction underived from the papacy.
      Kwasniewski claims he returned to tradition via Tomberg's Meditations on the Tarot, a work praising Madame Blavatsky, freemasonry and satanists. He endorses Roger Buck's sites promoting Tomberg, and has just published Morello's book on monasteries and magic. Kwasniewsky a Traditional Catholic is not, unfortunately.

      Delete
    11. Miguel CervantesMay 11, 2025 at 10:52 PM

      Kwasniewsky does indeed inscribe himself in the "tradition" of de Lubac and von Balthasar.

      Delete
  6. AnonymousMay 8, 2025 at 2:06 PM

    Even if we disagree with some of the Pope actions and decisions, let’s not forget Catechism of Saint Pope Pius X (https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/library/catechism-of-st-pius-x-1286) 203:
    «Every Catholic must acknowledge the Pope as Father, Pastor, and Universal Teacher, and be united with him in mind and heart.»

    ReplyDelete
  7. Dirk GhysensMay 8, 2025 at 4:16 PM

    The Augustinians gave Luther to the world.

    ReplyDelete
  8. AnonymousMay 8, 2025 at 5:11 PM

    He on I think it was x opposed Vance on the order of love regarding migrants and linked to Sister Helen Prajean at National Catholic Reporter on that topic. My guess from that evidence….he will leave ccc 2267 in its heretical state and leave Cardinal Fernandez in his office. I think that’s lethal for Brazil and Mexico’s murder victim numbers…Brazil yearly has tens of thousands more victims than China. Recent Catholic Popes never look at the data, never feel responsible for deterring future murderers….talked only of deterring the murderer you caught and convicted.

    ReplyDelete
  9. AnonymousMay 8, 2025 at 7:33 PM

    What is wrong with his hands in this picture? Is it an AI-generated graphic?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousMay 9, 2025 at 8:59 AM

      Totally must be.

      Delete
    2. AnonymousMay 10, 2025 at 6:38 AM

      It's zoomed in from a video where he is moving, which can appear grainy in a stillshot.

      Delete
  10. Miguel CervantesMay 8, 2025 at 8:04 PM

    Ideal name for a Pope wishing to move on from Vatican II. No doubt there will be a focus on the Church's social teaching from this first Peruvian Pope.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Maria LongshoreMay 8, 2025 at 8:30 PM

    Novus Ordo Watch claims that Prevost was instrumental in the removal of Strickland as the ordinary of Tyler, Texas. Doesn't sound good guys!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ficino4mlMay 10, 2025 at 8:09 AM

      This convert from Tyler TX who attended masses celebrated by Strickland gives reasons why it was proper to remove Strickland from pastoral authority. One thing: Strickland allegedly supported the claim that Francis was not the true Pope, i.e. S aligned with sedevacantism. A sedevacantist or sedevacantist-friendly BISHOP of a diocese?!

      https://www.ncronline.org/opinion/guest-voices/joseph-strickland-was-my-bishop-heres-why-he-had-go

      Delete
    2. TonyMay 10, 2025 at 5:45 PM

      If the claims about Strickland's vocal support for the letter that made these assertions are true, this would be very concerning and problematic behavior for a bishop. Enough to be called on the carpet and probably censured. NOT enough to be canned outright - not for that. And there no way dismissing a bishop without publicly stated cause, and without trial, is appropriate. The pope must not only do the right thing in situations like this, but must be seen to do the right thing, i.e. there needs to be public accounting for it. Given the many, many times bishops have done far more egregious things these past 50 years without being censured much less dismissed, this was in effect a lawless act that shouldn't have been. Francis also removed the bishop of Arecibo, Puerto Rico, for no announced reason, but apparently for the reason that he wanted to keep his seminarians at home to teach them orthodox theology rather than send them to the communal seminary that he didn't like.

      It is possible Francis had better reasons than have come out. He had a duty to make those reasons manifest.

      Delete
  12. TonyMay 8, 2025 at 10:24 PM

    Word on the street seems to be that he is sort-of, kind-of, centrist, but that he is clearly at least leaning toward progressive ideas in some areas. He certainly got favorable attention from Francis, who made him not only cardinal but prefect for Congregation of Bishops. (I am going to hope that they go back to congregations, because "dicastery" is a legalistic term at best, bureaucratic in nature.) But he also appears to have kept his cards close to his vest on many things, and this suggests to me that his views on those were less progressive than Francis and his clique. Which probably just means centrist. Which (given the state of the world these past 50 years) could mean just barely orthodox. I'll pray for him and hope for good things,...but will keep watch.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousMay 9, 2025 at 7:39 AM

      Sometimes you have to tow the line. Now that he's in charge, he can set his own agenda. And it looks like it's already going to be a different one from Pope Francis' (pace in requiescat).

      Delete
    2. AnonymousMay 10, 2025 at 1:13 AM

      I suspect Pope Francis may have liked him more for his missionary work, for being deeply involved with the poor and the discarded.

      I think many people were elevated by Pope Francis for this reason.

      Delete
  13. ficino4mlMay 9, 2025 at 6:11 AM

    There are a number of articles in the media with headlines like "MAGA Melts Down," quoting people calling Leo XIV a woke Marxist. Isn't it supposed to be by the will of God that he was elected? God wants a woke Marxist pope?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. TonyMay 10, 2025 at 5:55 PM

      No. Just no.

      God will not allow bishops, cardinals, and popes to do such things that are so horribly wrong that they completely destroy the Church. Other than that, God does not act so as to prevent prelates from doing bad things that damage the Church - they do so all the time, as can be seen in history easily. He just prevents such horrific actions that would completely wreck the Church, that's all. Indeed, the book of Revelation suggests via prophecy that there will indeed be horrible prelates who will lead people astray. God's work will eventually come to fruition with final victory made manifest, but individual people will not enjoy that victory if they set their wills against God and they end up in hell. That can go for popes and cardinals as much as others. The cardinals can chose to not cooperate with the grace of the Holy Spirit, and elect a pope who is a stinker whose morals or theology are problematic.

      I don't know if this pope is marxist, but the fact that some people are hysterically claiming it doesn't make me think it's true.

      Delete
  14. AnonymousMay 9, 2025 at 8:07 AM

    St. Leo the Great, pray for us.

    ReplyDelete
  15. AnonymousMay 10, 2025 at 5:30 AM

    I'm cautiously optimistic!

    His X account reposting an article that seemed to completely reject the Ordo Amoris was concerning, also the 2015 post calling for the abolition of the death penalty too. But, then it could be that he isn't even the one who actually runs his X account. Could be some secretary or intern or whatever. I don't think we should assume that.

    These are the only thing. Everything else seems either super positive or of secondary concern. Making statements that are in line with Christian teaching, but are misapplied due to misunderstanding the facts on the ground (such as with climate change or immigration and even the death penalty) aren't particularly concerning to me.

    Those automatically declaring him a leftist, or a progressive, or woke, there doesn't really seem to be much evidence of that beyond exaggerating minor things.

    ReplyDelete
  16. AnonymousMay 10, 2025 at 2:58 PM

    Dr Feser in his X writes about the disrespect shown to Pope Francis. I read many disrespectful comments about Francis from posters on this blog.

    ReplyDelete
  17. AnonymousMay 10, 2025 at 6:18 PM

    Pope Leo XIV speaks admiringly of Pope Francis and why he chose the name Leo XIV.
    https://www.cnn.com/2025/05/10/europe/pope-leo-prevost-cardinals-artificial-intelligence-intl

    ReplyDelete
  18. AnonymousMay 11, 2025 at 7:57 AM

    I cannot help but contrast your admiration of Leo’s decision to visibly “subordinate[] himself to [his] office and understand[] the importance of continuity with the past” with the behavior of a certain current President who shall remain nameless.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Michael CopasMay 17, 2025 at 6:55 AM

    I am very much enjoying your twitter comments on Pope Leo XIV. Your recent one on his address to diplomats was inspiring. His initial homily was also beautiful. I hope your busy schedule continues to allow some time to write on his homilies and teachings (as your principle duties permit).

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)