Pope Leo XIV: What to know about first American pope, where he's from, name choice
Cardinal Robert Prévost, 69, was elected pope just after noon CT. This marks the first pope from the United States.
Prévost will go by the papal name Pope Leo XIV.
White smoke was seen above the Sistine Chapel just after 11 a.m. CT, or 6 p.m. local time in Rome, on Thursday, May 8.
Live updates: A new pope has been named: White smoke pours from Vatican.
Watch: Video shows white smoke emerging from Sistine Chapel as Vatican roars with cheers
Cardinal Robert Prévost, from Chicago, Illinois, was named pope just after noon CT. Prévost will go by the papal name of Pope Leo XIV.
After a candidate is selected by a majority of the vote, white smoke is released to signal to the public the conclave is ending. Then, the new pope must decide if he wants to fill the role. Then he enters a chamber in the chapel known as the Room of Tears – named for the emotional reactions of popes who realize their new responsibilities.
The pope dons papal vestments and the cardinals pay homage. Then the pope is taken to the central balcony of St. Peter's Basilica, where a senior cardinal announces "Habemus Papam," the Latin term for "We have a pope" to the waiting crowd.
The pope then addresses the crowd, blessing them, the city and the world.
Pope Leo XIV was born Robert Francis Prévost on Sept. 14, 1955, in Chicago, Illinois. He is 69 years old.
Each pope selects a new name as one of their first actions as the new head of the Roman Catholic Church, and their selection can play a huge role in setting the tone for his pontificate.
For example, Pope Francis chose his name to honor St. Francis of Assisi, and his predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI, chose his name to show his commitment to peace by reflecting St. Benedict and Pope Benedict XV, who was head of the church during World War I.
CNN reports that the precedent was first set in the Middle Ages, and there's no doctrinal reason for it, but it's become part of the election process over the years.
Prévost chose the papal name of Pope Leo XIV.
The selection could be a reference to Leo XIII who was known for his dedication to social justice, fair wages and safe working conditions.
This pope is the 14th to choose the name Leo, which is now tied as the fourth-most popular papal name. The most popular are John (21), Gregory (16), Benedict (15), and Clement (14), according to the Vatican.
After two days of voting, the cardinals elected a new pope. Modern conclaves typically last two to three days, with Pope Francis also elected in two days.
The shortest conclave was 10 hours and ended with the election of Pope Julius II in 1503.
Over the last 100 years, the shortest conclaves lasted a day: Pius XII was elected in 1939 (three ballots) and John Paul I in 1978 (three or four ballots), according to the New York Times.
Pope Francis, who died on Easter Monday, was elected in March 2013 after five ballots were cast across two days, making it one of the quickest decisions in modern times.
The longest conclave in recorded history started in 1268 and ended in 1271, when Pope Gregory X was elected. The process took two years and nine months and helped form the rules for future conclaves.
No conclave has lasted more than four days since 1831.
Contributing: Lori Comstock, USA TODAY Network
This article originally appeared on Oklahoman: Who is Pope Leo XIV? What to know about American pope, short conclave
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
5 hours ago
- CNN
201 ways to say ‘f**k': what 1.7 billion words of online text shows about how the world swears
EDITOR'S NOTE: CNN is showcasing the work of The Conversation, a collaboration between journalists and academics to provide news analysis and commentary. The content is produced solely by The Conversation. This story contains graphic language that some readers may find offensive. Our brains swear for good reasons: to vent, cope, boost our grit and feel closer to those around us. Swear words can act as social glue and play meaningful roles in how people communicate, connect and express themselves – both in person, and online. In our new research published in Lingua, we analysed more than 1.7 billion words of online language across 20 English-speaking regions. We identified 597 different swear word forms – from standard words, to creative spellings like '4rseholes', to acronyms like 'wtf'. The findings challenge a familiar stereotype. Australians – often thought of as prolific swearers – are actually outdone by Americans and Brits, both in how often they swear, and in how many users swear online. Our study focused on publicly available web data (such as news articles, organisational websites, government or institutional publications, and blogs – but excluding social media and private messaging). We found vulgar words made up 0.036% of all words in the dataset from the United States, followed by 0.025% in the British data and 0.022% in the Australian data. Although vulgar language is relatively rare in terms of overall word frequency, it was used by a significant number of individuals. Between 12% and 13.3% of Americans, around 10% of Brits, and 9.4% of Australians used at least one vulgar word in their data. Overall, the most frequent vulgar word was 'fuck' – with all its variants, it amounted to a stunning 201 different forms. We focused on online language that didn't include social media, because large-scale comparisons need robust, purpose-built datasets. In our case, we used the Global Web-Based English (GloWbE) corpus, which was specifically designed to compare how English is used across different regions online. So how much were our findings influenced by the online data we used? Telling results come from research happening at the same time as ours. One study analysed the use of 'fuck' in social networks on X, examining how network size and strength influence swearing in the UK, US and Australia. It used data from 5,660 networks with more than 435,000 users and 7.8 billion words and found what we did. Americans use 'fuck' most frequently, while Australians use it the least, but with the most creative spelling variations (some comfort for anyone feeling let down by our online swearing stats). Americans hold relatively conservative attitudes toward public morality, and their high swearing rates are surprising. The cultural contradiction may reflect the country's strong individualistic culture. Americans often value personal expression – especially in private or anonymous settings like the internet. Meanwhile, public displays of swearing are often frowned upon in the US. This is partly due to the lingering influence of religious norms, which frame swearing – particularly religious-based profanity – as a violation of moral decency. Significantly, the only religious-based swear word in our dataset, 'damn', was used most frequently by Americans. Research suggests swearing is more acceptable in Australian public discourse. Certainly, Australia's public airing of swear words often takes visitors by surprise. The long-running road safety slogan 'If you drink, then drive, you're a bloody idiot' is striking – such language is rare in official messaging elsewhere. Australians may be comfortable swearing in person, but our findings indicate they dial it back online – surprising for a nation so fond of its vernacular. In terms of preferences for specific forms of vulgarity, Americans showed a strong preference for variations of 'ass(hole)', the Irish favored 'feck', the British preferred 'cunt', and Pakistanis leaned toward 'butt(hole)'. The only statistically significant aversion we found was among Americans, who tended to avoid the word 'bloody' (folk wisdom claims the word is blasphemous). People from countries where English is the dominant language – such as the US, Britain, Australia, Canada, New Zealand and Ireland – tend to swear more frequently and with more lexical variety than people in regions where English is less dominant like India, Pakistan, Hong Kong, Ghana or the Philippines. This pattern holds for both frequency and creativity in swearing. But Singapore ranked fourth in terms of frequency of swearing in our study, just behind Australia and ahead of New Zealand, Ireland and Canada. English in Singapore is increasingly seen not as a second language, but as a native language, and as a tool for identity, belonging and creativity. Young Singaporeans use social swearing to push back against authority, especially given the government's strict rules on public language. One possible reason we saw less swearing among non-native English speakers is that it is rarely taught. Despite its frequency and social utility, swearing – alongside humour and informal speech – is often left out of language education. Cultural, social and technological shifts are reshaping linguistic norms, blurring the already blurry lines between informal and formal, private and public language. Just consider the Aussie contributions to the July Oxford English Dictionary updates: expressions like 'to strain the potatoes' (to urinate), 'no wuckers' and 'no wucking furries' (from 'no fucking worries'). Swearing and vulgarity aren't just crass or abusive. While they can be used harmfully, research consistently shows they serve important communicative functions – colourful language builds rapport, expresses humour and emotion, signals solidarity and eases tension. It's clear that swearing isn't just a bad habit that can be easily kicked, like nail-biting or smoking indoors. Besides, history shows that telling people not to swear is one of the best ways to keep swearing alive and well. Martin Schweinberger is a lecturer in applied linguistics at The University of Queensland. Kate Burridge is professor of linguistics at Monash University. Republished under a Creative Commons license from The Conversation.
CNN
5 hours ago
- CNN
201 ways to say ‘f**k': what 1.7 billion words of online text shows about how the world swears
EDITOR'S NOTE: CNN is showcasing the work of The Conversation, a collaboration between journalists and academics to provide news analysis and commentary. The content is produced solely by The Conversation. This story contains graphic language that some readers may find offensive. Our brains swear for good reasons: to vent, cope, boost our grit and feel closer to those around us. Swear words can act as social glue and play meaningful roles in how people communicate, connect and express themselves – both in person, and online. In our new research published in Lingua, we analysed more than 1.7 billion words of online language across 20 English-speaking regions. We identified 597 different swear word forms – from standard words, to creative spellings like '4rseholes', to acronyms like 'wtf'. The findings challenge a familiar stereotype. Australians – often thought of as prolific swearers – are actually outdone by Americans and Brits, both in how often they swear, and in how many users swear online. Our study focused on publicly available web data (such as news articles, organisational websites, government or institutional publications, and blogs – but excluding social media and private messaging). We found vulgar words made up 0.036% of all words in the dataset from the United States, followed by 0.025% in the British data and 0.022% in the Australian data. Although vulgar language is relatively rare in terms of overall word frequency, it was used by a significant number of individuals. Between 12% and 13.3% of Americans, around 10% of Brits, and 9.4% of Australians used at least one vulgar word in their data. Overall, the most frequent vulgar word was 'fuck' – with all its variants, it amounted to a stunning 201 different forms. We focused on online language that didn't include social media, because large-scale comparisons need robust, purpose-built datasets. In our case, we used the Global Web-Based English (GloWbE) corpus, which was specifically designed to compare how English is used across different regions online. So how much were our findings influenced by the online data we used? Telling results come from research happening at the same time as ours. One study analysed the use of 'fuck' in social networks on X, examining how network size and strength influence swearing in the UK, US and Australia. It used data from 5,660 networks with more than 435,000 users and 7.8 billion words and found what we did. Americans use 'fuck' most frequently, while Australians use it the least, but with the most creative spelling variations (some comfort for anyone feeling let down by our online swearing stats). Americans hold relatively conservative attitudes toward public morality, and their high swearing rates are surprising. The cultural contradiction may reflect the country's strong individualistic culture. Americans often value personal expression – especially in private or anonymous settings like the internet. Meanwhile, public displays of swearing are often frowned upon in the US. This is partly due to the lingering influence of religious norms, which frame swearing – particularly religious-based profanity – as a violation of moral decency. Significantly, the only religious-based swear word in our dataset, 'damn', was used most frequently by Americans. Research suggests swearing is more acceptable in Australian public discourse. Certainly, Australia's public airing of swear words often takes visitors by surprise. The long-running road safety slogan 'If you drink, then drive, you're a bloody idiot' is striking – such language is rare in official messaging elsewhere. Australians may be comfortable swearing in person, but our findings indicate they dial it back online – surprising for a nation so fond of its vernacular. In terms of preferences for specific forms of vulgarity, Americans showed a strong preference for variations of 'ass(hole)', the Irish favored 'feck', the British preferred 'cunt', and Pakistanis leaned toward 'butt(hole)'. The only statistically significant aversion we found was among Americans, who tended to avoid the word 'bloody' (folk wisdom claims the word is blasphemous). People from countries where English is the dominant language – such as the US, Britain, Australia, Canada, New Zealand and Ireland – tend to swear more frequently and with more lexical variety than people in regions where English is less dominant like India, Pakistan, Hong Kong, Ghana or the Philippines. This pattern holds for both frequency and creativity in swearing. But Singapore ranked fourth in terms of frequency of swearing in our study, just behind Australia and ahead of New Zealand, Ireland and Canada. English in Singapore is increasingly seen not as a second language, but as a native language, and as a tool for identity, belonging and creativity. Young Singaporeans use social swearing to push back against authority, especially given the government's strict rules on public language. One possible reason we saw less swearing among non-native English speakers is that it is rarely taught. Despite its frequency and social utility, swearing – alongside humour and informal speech – is often left out of language education. Cultural, social and technological shifts are reshaping linguistic norms, blurring the already blurry lines between informal and formal, private and public language. Just consider the Aussie contributions to the July Oxford English Dictionary updates: expressions like 'to strain the potatoes' (to urinate), 'no wuckers' and 'no wucking furries' (from 'no fucking worries'). Swearing and vulgarity aren't just crass or abusive. While they can be used harmfully, research consistently shows they serve important communicative functions – colourful language builds rapport, expresses humour and emotion, signals solidarity and eases tension. It's clear that swearing isn't just a bad habit that can be easily kicked, like nail-biting or smoking indoors. Besides, history shows that telling people not to swear is one of the best ways to keep swearing alive and well. Martin Schweinberger is a lecturer in applied linguistics at The University of Queensland. Kate Burridge is professor of linguistics at Monash University. Republished under a Creative Commons license from The Conversation.
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
Video highlights debate over giant rodents overtaking upscale gated community: 'God forbid'
A TikTok video from The New York Times (@nytimes) captured the unusual sight of capybaras strolling through an exclusive Argentine gated community. The video shows that dozens of capybaras have colonized this upscale neighborhood, treating expensive gardens like personal salad bars and using roads as their preferred walking paths. These rodents have been holding up traffic during their strolls, chomping through costly landscaping, and occasionally getting into scuffles with small dogs. Biologists hired by the community learned why the population exploded: Their natural predators had vanished from the area. The capybaras multiply freely without jaguars, caimans, and other hunters keeping numbers in check. "God forbid! They roam through what is their natural habitat that you turned into a gated community," one TikTok commenter wrote. To manage the growing population, developers now sterilize some capybaras through a project approved by the local government. This capybara invasion is part of a growing global problem as human development pushes deeper into wildlife territory. Research shows that human-wildlife conflicts have steadily increased since 1950, mainly driven by urban sprawl and habitat destruction. When we build communities where animals once lived freely, we force wildlife into impossible situations. The capybaras aren't invading. They're trying to survive in what used to be their wetland home. As their natural habitats shrink, these gentle giants adapt by making the best of concrete and grass. For humans, these encounters create real dangers. Property damage from hungry capybaras adds up quickly, and confrontations between large animals and pets rarely end well, according to the BBC. More concerning, such conflicts often result in wildlife being killed, hindering conservation efforts long term. The community is taking a humane approach by sterilizing capybaras rather than removing them. This method controls population growth while recognizing that these animals have legitimate claims to the area. Should the government be paying people to hunt invasive species? Definitely Depends on the animal No way Just let people do it for free Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. You can help prevent similar conflicts by supporting habitat conservation in your community. When planning development projects, advocate for wildlife corridors that allow animals to move safely through human areas. Supporting wetland protection ensures capybaras and other wildlife have places to thrive without raiding suburban neighborhoods. Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
