At Sunday Mass in New York, Americans celebrate their new pope
At Sunday Mass, the landmark, Gothic-style church - the focal point of Catholicism in the most populous U.S. city - was brimming with worshippers eager to celebrate the unexpected achievement of Chicago native Robert Prevost, now known as Pope Leo XIV.
Many were happy to share their thoughts on the new pontiff and the variety of ways they could relate to him personally.
On the steps leading to the cathedral gates, Patrick Sheridan, who came to the Mass from New Jersey, stood alongside his wife Mary. The couple were elated to learn that the new pope was a graduate of Philadelphia's Villanova University, the same school many of their family members attended.
"We were extremely excited when we heard about it," Patrick Sheridan said.
Cardinal Timothy Dolan, the archbishop of New York, was still in Rome on Sunday after the pope's selection, Monsignor Joseph LaMorte, the archdiocese's vicar general, told parishioners during Mass.
LaMorte, who is Dolan's deputy, said he was keen to meet with the cardinal when he returns to New York.
"We can't wait to hear some of the stories that he's allowed to talk about," LaMorte said. "You know the secrecy of the conclave is very, very serious."
Jason Graham, speaking outside the cathedral, said having an American Pope could help improve the image of the United States abroad.
"Our country's not looking so great, especially with the current administration," Graham said, referring to President Donald Trump's tariffs and other policies that are unpopular in other countries.
"But I think that (the new pope) is a positive influence for America, and I think he's going to have a positive impact on how other people in the world will see America," he said.
For Lucero De Paz, a Hispanic American from Texas, the most appealing aspect of Leo XIV's background was his missionary and humanitarian work in Peru, where the new pope spent decades and was granted a second citizenship.
"I felt a lot better, I think, about where he stands as far as immigration issues that are happening today," De Paz said. "Well-being of all Latinos is a huge issue to me, not just as a Christian and Catholic, but also culturally."
Trump has taken a series of aggressive measures aimed at cracking down on illegal immigrants, many of them from Latin America, since he took office in January.
Sadie Murlaney, who hails from Scotland, came to New York to celebrate her birthday and stopped by St. Patrick's for the Mass. She said she was happy to learn that the new pope took the same name as her first grandson Leo.
Murlaney said she would pray for the pope to help restore peace in the world.
"With all the wars going on, it's not a nice place just now," she said. "We hopefully pray for him to help any way we can."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
2 hours ago
- Reuters
Trump's data war risks creating false calm
LONDON, Aug 14 (Reuters) - Political pressure on government statisticians and private forecasters risks sending markets down a rabbit-hole, which could suppress volatility today but lead to seismic reality checks in the future. U.S. President Donald Trump has side-swiped both private and public sector economists this month, firing the Bureau of Labor Statistics boss for what he described as "rigged" jobs data and then lambasting Goldman Sachs for tariff-related research he didn't agree with. These moves seem alarming, even if there are some mitigating factors. Trump is hardly the first person to criticize BLS payrolls data. It has been under scrutiny for years, not because of fears of bias, but because of low survey response rates and delays, which have often resulted in large changes to past data. The most recent report contained one of the biggest downward revisions in decades. The BLS can argue that it has suffered from years of underfunding, but it's still not a good look. What's more, similar questions about data collection have been lobbed at the BLS regarding its compilation of monthly consumer and producer price reports, which are critical now in assessing the impact of Trump's tariff rises on inflation. These statistics, along with the U.S. employment report, are the most important monthly updates for financial markets, mainly because they play a pivotal role in Federal Reserve thinking, given its dual mandate to maintain maximum employment and stable prices. Trump this week appointed Heritage Foundation economist E.J. Antoni - a contributor to the controversial Project 2025, opens new tab wishlist of policies for a second Trump term - to run the BLS. Antoni recently suggested suspending the monthly payrolls report until data problems were fixed, which could result in long data gaps at a critical moment for the U.S. economy, monetary policy and markets. Importantly though, the White House and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent have pushed back on that idea. But then came Tuesday's attack on Goldman boss David Solomon, with calls for him to appoint a new chief economist following the release of a report on Sunday by his colleague Jan Hatzius. The report estimated U.S. consumers had so far borne less than a quarter of the cost of tariffs but could see that rise to two-thirds over time. This may simply be nothing more than Trump complaining about a forecast he doesn't like, but it's still a move that risks tinkering with one of the most basic market tenets: the plurality of views. There's an obvious concern that - intentionally or not - these public attacks could cause economic data, research and forecasts to become more pro-government or lead to self-censorship by those keen to avoid seeing their business or careers damaged by presidential opprobrium. To its credit, Goldman said it would keep doing its job regardless of the political pressure. But it would hardly say otherwise. Perhaps more telling was the lack of public outcry from other economists who might reasonably be concerned that Trump's attacks on unflattering forecasts represent a worrying trend for their profession and market transparency overall. Of course, they or their institutions may simply have thought it best to stay quiet, assuming the issue would blow over soon. Does any of this matter long term? To be sure, economic forecasting can hardly be held up as a sacred cow if accuracy is what matters. A University of California, Berkeley study late last year looked at more than 16,000 forecasts, opens new tab by banks and large firms and concluded that while 53% of forecasters were confident in their predictions, they were correct only 23% of the time. But economists' forecasts still play a role, accurate or not. So any type of bias, even unintentional, could have a significant impact on market thinking. Of course, if there were a consensus that official data was likely to be biased to flatter the government, then the process of forecasting those official numbers may just be to mechanically move in that direction. But that would undoubtedly create confusion. To better capture what's really going on, investors may be more inclined to commission private economic data. And yet the cost of doing that on a frequent basis would be prohibitive for smaller players, meaning big information gaps could open up, making markets less efficient overall. If political bias in official data and forecasting were to emerge in the current environment, one might expect to see firmer job creation and softer inflation readouts. That could keep markets calm in the short term. But any weakness in the real economy would emerge eventually, likely resulting in a rude awakening for many, no matter what the official data says. The opinions expressed here are those of the author, a columnist for Reuters -- Enjoying this column? Check out Reuters Open Interest (ROI), your essential new source for global financial commentary. Follow ROI on LinkedIn. Plus, sign up for my weekday newsletter, Morning Bid U.S.
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
‘Censorship': over 115 scholars condemn cancellation of Harvard journal issue on Palestine
More than 115 education scholars have condemned the cancellation of an entire issue of an academic journal dedicated to Palestine by a Harvard University publisher as 'censorship'. In an open letter published on Thursday, the scholars denounced the abrupt scrapping of a special issue of the Harvard Educational Review – which was first revealed by the Guardian in July – as an 'attempt to silence the academic examination of the genocide, starvation and dehumanisation of Palestinian people by the state of Israel and its allies.' The writers note that the issue's censorship is also an example of 'anti-Palestinian discrimination, obstructing the dissemination of knowledge on Palestine at the height of the genocide in Gaza'. The special issue of the prestigious education journal was planned six months into Israel's war in Gaza to tackle questions about the education of Palestinians, education about Palestine and Palestinians, and related debates in schools and colleges in the US, as the Guardian previously reported. 'The field of education has an important role to play in supporting students, educators, and policymakers in contextualizing what has been happening in Gaza,' the journal's editors wrote in their call for abstracts – which came against the backdrop of the devastation of Gaza's educational infrastructure, including the shuttering of hundreds of schools and destruction of all of the territory's universities. More than a year later, the special issue was just about ready – all articles had been edited, contracts with most authors had been finalized, and the issue had been advertised at academic conferences and on the back cover of the previous one. But late in the process, the Harvard Education Publishing Group, a division of the Harvard Graduate School of Education which publishes the journal, demanded that all articles be submitted to a 'risk assessment' review by Harvard's general counsel – an unprecedented demand. When the authors protested, the publisher responded by abruptly cancelling the issue altogether. In an email obtained by the Guardian, the group's executive director, Jessica Fiorillo, cited what she described as an inadequate review process and the need for 'considerable copy editing' as well as a 'lack of internal alignment' about the special issue. She said that the decision was not 'due to censorship of a particular viewpoint nor does it connect to matters of academic freedom'. The authors and editors flatly rejected that characterization, telling the Guardian that the cancellation set a dangerous precedent and was an example of what many scholars have come to refer to as the 'Palestine exception' to academic freedom. 'The decision by HEPG to abandon their own institutional mission – as well as the responsibilities that their world-leading stature demands – is scholasticide in action,' the dozens of scholars who signed the recent letter also wrote, using a term coined by Palestinian scholars to describe Israel's 'deliberate and systematic destruction' of Palestine's educational system. 'It is unconscionable that HEPG have chosen to publicly frame their cancellation of the special issue as a matter of academic quality, while omitting key publicly-reported facts that point to censorship.' Arathi Sriprakash, a professor of sociology and education at the University of Oxford and one of the letter's signatories, told the Guardian that the special issue's cancellation has mobilised so many education scholars 'precisely because we recognise the grave consequences of such threats to academic freedom and academic integrity'. 'The ongoing genocidal violence in Gaza has involved the physical destruction of the entire higher education system there, and now in many education institutions around the world there are active attempts to shut down learning about what's happening altogether. As educationalists, we have to remain steadfast in our commitment to the pursuit of knowledge and learning without fear or threat.' The ordeal around the special Palestine issue played out against the backdrop of the Trump administration's crackdown on US higher education institutions' autonomy on the basis of combating alleged antisemitism on campuses. Harvard is the only university that has sued the administration in response to it cutting billions of dollars in federal funds and other punishing measures it has unleashed on universities. But internally, Harvard has pre-empted many of the administration's demands, including by demoting scholars, scrapping initiatives giving space to Palestinian narratives and adopting a controversial definition of antisemitism that critics say is antithetical to academic inquiry. In conversations with the Harvard Educational Review editors, the journal's publisher acknowledged that it was seeking legal review of the articles out of fears that their publication would prompt antisemitism claims, an editor at the journal said. Harvard is reportedly close to finalizing a settlement with the Trump administration along the lines of those reached by other top universities. Thea Abu El-Haj, a Palestinian-American anthropologist of education at Barnard College and one of 21 contributors to the cancelled special issue, criticized the university's handling of the matter as yet another sign of institutional capitulation. 'If the universities – or in this case a university press – are not willing to stand up for what is core to their mission, I don't know what they're doing,' she told the Guardian last month. 'What's the point?' A spokesperson for the Harvard Graduate School of Education did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the latest letter but in an earlier statement to the Guardian wrote that the publisher 'remains deeply committed to our robust editorial process'. Last month, the free speech group PEN America also condemned the special issue's cancellation as a 'blatant assault on academic freedom'. 'Canceling an entire issue so close to publication is highly unusual, virtually unheard of,' Kristen Shahverdian, the program director for the group's Campus Free Speech initiative, said in a statement. 'Silencing these scholarly voices robs academics, students, and the public of the opportunity to engage with their insights. It also sends a chilling message in the context of the Trump administration's unrelenting pressure on Harvard University and mounting political interference in higher education, including efforts that target scholarship on Palestine.'
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Trump news at a glance: president eyes ‘long-term' DC police takeover; warns Putin of consequences if no ceasefire reached
After deploying the national guard to the streets of the American capital, Donald Trump is now eyeing longer-term powers over authorities, saying on Wednesday that he is seeking to extend his temporary powers over Washington DC's police department. Trump earlier this week invoked a never-before-used clause of the law that sets out the federal district's governance structure to take temporary control of the police department, but will need Congress's permission to extend it beyond the 30 days allowed under the statute. 'We're going to need a crime bill that we're going to be putting in, and it's going to pertain initially to DC,' Trump said. He alluded to other options for extending control of the police department, saying 'if it's a national emergency, we can do it without Congress'. Here are the key stories at a glance: Donald Trump said on Wednesday he would ask Congress for 'long-term' control of Washington DC's police department and signaled he expected other Democratic-led cities to change their laws in response to his deployment of national guard troops and federal agents into the capital. The president's comments came as the White House took credit for dozens of arrests overnight in Washington as part of Trump's campaign to fight a 'crime crisis', which its leaders say does not exist. Read the full story Vladimir Putin will face 'very severe consequences' if he does not agree a ceasefire in the war in Ukraine at his summit with Donald Trump in Alaska, the US president said on Wednesday. Speaking after a call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy and other European leaders, including Britain's Keir Starmer, Trump also suggested he would push for a second summit if his meeting with Putin goes well – this time including his Ukrainian counterpart. Read the full story Donald Trump announced on Wednesday that he will host the Kennedy Center honors this year and said he had been heavily involved in choosing who to nominate, rejecting people he thought were too liberal. Read the full story A senior official appointed to the defense department led a thinktank that promoted fake news about the Venezuelan Tren de Aragua (TdA) gang, according to InSight Crime, a non-profit analyzing organized crime. Read the full story A grassroots organization of health professionals has released a report outlining major health challenges in the US and calling for the removal of Robert F Kennedy Jr from the US Department of Health and Human Services. Read the full story Donald Trump on Wednesday revoked a 2021 executive order on promoting competition in the US economy issued by Joe Biden, the White House said. Biden signed a sweeping executive order in July 2021 to promote more competition in the US economy as part of a broad push to rein in what his administration described as a pattern of corporate abuses, ranging from excessive airline fees to large mergers that raised costs for consumers. Read the full story A US judge ordered the Trump administration to restore a part of the federal grant funding that it recently suspended for the University of California, Los Angeles. Veteran climate scientists are organizing a coordinated public comment to a US Department of Energy report which cast doubt on the scientific consensus on the climate crisis. Catching up? Here's what happened on 12 August 2025.
