Measuring up the new Pope Leo XIV

The Catholic world has a new pontiff – and it seems everyone is forming opinions about him.  Since Leo is brand new to the world, I am hesitant to offer a lot of serious opinions about the guy’s ideological, philosophic and political viewpoints.  It seems a lot of other folks are not as judicious.  So … I will focus my own observations mostly on the opinions of others.

We do know a few factoids.  Robert Prevost was born and raised in Chicago – my hometown.  His father was French/Italian.  The ancestry on his mother’s side is less clear.  She has been described as Peruvian, Creole and with some Black ancestry. 

(I can relate to that since my DNA test showed a small percentage of Nigerian blood.  Which prompted me to call my adopted Black daughter to tell her that we were more closely related than we ever could have imagined. But digress.)

For his part, Leo has identified himself as White and Peruvian.  He spent much of his clergy career doing missionary work in Peru.  Leo was elevated to cardinal by Francis – and eventually brought to Rome as Prefect of the Dicastery for Bishops.  He was the guy who vetted candidates for bishops and cardinals.  (Perhaps now we know why he had so much support among the College of Cardinals).

It is not surprising that those forming early – and perhaps premature — opinions of Leo break along he same political fault line that divides America – and much of the world.

On the left, we hear a lot of praise.  “He is a man of the people.”  “He cares about the poor and disadvantaged.”  Those are platitudes — and how every pope has been described.  It must come from all those photographs of popes kissing children, visiting the poor in Africa, and washing the feet of the poor – and occasionally those in prison.

(Pope Francis had a particular care for prisoners.  One of his last acts was washing the feet of a prisoner.  He also left $200,000 euros to a workshop for prisoners.   But I digress again.)

The point is that popes are always described as humble and dedicated to the disadvantaged.  Consequently, all the euphoric celebratory praise does not tell us a lot about Leo.

More germane is the Pope’s political views.  Francis was a dyed-in-the-wool left-wing socialist.  That is why he was so critical of any United States policies that could be viewed as conservative – everything from immigration to capitalism.  And … that is why folks on the right (like me) were not very fond of Francis.  That feeling appears to have been carried over to Leo by some conservative leaders (although I am not among them; I am keeping a more open mind with regard to Leo).

While Leo has generally embraced left-wing opinions on such things as immigration, climate control, he may not be a clone of Francis – even if his middle name is “Francis.”  From past statements, Leo may be less open-minded on the issues of abortion and homosexuality, for example. 

There are two other indications of a more moderate Pope.  Leo had voted in several American general elections.  We do not know how he voted.  In fact, the only indication we have of his political partisanship is the fact that he voted in Republican primaries.

In addition, it has been reported that the New York Cardinal Timothy Dolan was the kingmaker in the Conclave – influencing the Asian and African prelates to vote for Prevost over the odds-on favorite, Italian Cardinal Pietro Parolin.  Dolan is among the most conservative cardinals in the Church.  He is President Trump’s favorite cardinal.  Dolan is not likely to have supported a left-wing candidate.  Since the Conclave, a number of cardinals have indicated that Leo is not a carbon copy of Francis.

I suppose if you have to label Leo, he appears to be more moderate than Francis.   He may lean left, but it may be a misnomer to call him woke.  However, we will not know where he fits on the philosophic/political scale for another year or so.

While Francis can fairly be described as anti-American, Leo — as an American — is less likely to so overtly critical of the United States – and the Trump administration.  He seems to be less of a globalist – less political — and more dedicated to the missionary evangelical side of the Church.

Leo’s pre-papal statements about Vice President Vance offended many on the right.  I see that statement as having been made when Cardinal Prevost was less prominent – with less need to be judicious and diplomatic.  Vance – a relatively new convert to Catholicism – won no accolades from Francis, leading one writer to declare that Vance has now been publicly criticized by two popes.  (Hmm.  The popes jump all over a nice Catholic boy like Vance and praise an old Catholic apostate like Biden, who has bucked the Church on the core issue of abortion.  Methinks that smacks of political bias and hypocrisy – at least on the part of Francis.  We do not know how Leo would have handled the Biden abortion issue.)

Some of the extreme animosity directed at Leo comes from those who see him as a clone of Francis.  They view him as Francis II.  Some of the vitriol appears to rise out of a generally anti-Catholic sentiment.  Incidentally, there is a lot of anti-Catholicism and anti-Christianity on the left – perhaps even more than on the right.

Still … it is too early to put Leo into a philosophic bracket, although it is safe to assume he will lean to the left.  How far, is the question.  They all cannot be a Pope John Paul II.

And now for the really important stuff.

Personally, I have grave concerns about Leo.  He is a Chicago southsider Sox fan. As a northsider, I cheer for the Cubbies. It has been reported that Leo enjoys pizza.  When asked Leo’s preference, a local priest thought it was “thick crust.”  I hope not since that would be a second strike against the pontiff.  The classic Chicago pizza is a thin crust and cut into squares.  We true Chicagoans refer to the thick crust version as “tourist pizza.”  If Leo eats hot dogs with ketchup, then it is three strikes, and he is out in my book.  I will need to check that out.

And the final question is: Does it really matter?  I have long believed that popes have a prominent pulpit, but limited influence.  I know of no one – Catholic or otherwise – who takes their political views from the Pope. I even know a lot of Catholics who do not take their religious views from the Pope.  Think abortion, homosexuality, divorce, etc.  And the majority of Catholics (53 %) voted for President Trump despite the opinions of Francis.

At this early stage, I put Leo somewhere between Francis and John Paul II – with a lean toward Francis. 

So, there ‘tis.