The History Behind Pope Leo XIV's Name
Since the College of Cardinals selected Robert Prevost to become Pope Leo XIV on May 8, the first American Pope has generated much attention, with numerous publications attempting to peel back the curtain on the true identity of the new pontiff.
Yet, the Pope himself may have told the world something significant about his vision and philosophy for the papacy through the simple act of choosing a name. The choice of Leo XIV makes Prevost the first pope to take this name since Leo XIII, who led the Church from 1878 to 1903, a critical time at the turn of the 20th century when the world was heading into an industrial and increasingly globalizing era that would soon lead to the First World War.
Based on the tenure of Leo XIII, this choice may indicate that Prevost places substantial emphasis on the Church's responsibility to care for the poor, as well as the protection of workers' rights in an era of growing economic inequality. Yet, it also may signal that the new pope aims to chart a middle course in an era of extremes and won't look kindly on those challenging doctrine or the Church's hierarchy. If so, such a vision will be deeply rooted in a specific tradition of American Catholicism that emerged thanks to Leo XIII's teachings.
Pope Leo XIII, born Gioacchino Pecci, ascended to the papacy in an era characterized by the spread of factories and wage labor, the rise of massive fortunes and the growth of worker discontent and organizing, and existential battles between the forces of capitalism and socialism. He responded by launching a transformative intellectual tradition known as Catholic social teaching.
Pope Leo's Style of American Leadership Is a Hopeful Opportunity
This body of thought, which had its most notable appearance in his 1891 encyclical, Rerum Novarum, introduced the world to a new approach to the social, economic, and political challenges of the day. Rerum upheld labor unions as a proper exercise of workers' natural rights to dignity and authentic freedom—and emphasized the obligation of the state to protect their rights and interests. Leo XIII also called for a 'remedy…for the misery and wretchedness pressing so unjustly on the majority of the working class.' He underscored the Catholic Church's care for the poor and its concern for the common good as well.
Yet, Catholic social teaching wasn't a one-sided doctrine. In Rerum, Pope Leo XIII reflected on 'the spirit of revolutionary change' that had 'long been disturbing the nations of the world.' Instead of a revolution, this new approach contemplated a middle way between capitalism and socialism, one premised on a cooperative relationship between workers and management.
Another key document written by Leo XIII further emphasized that the Pope was not quite a radical. In 1899, he wrote a papal letter, Testem Benevolentiae Nostrae, which was directed at American Catholics and condemned what he termed the heresy of 'Americanism.' The decision to write the letter may have stemmed from confusion and misperceptions about what liberal prelates and theologians in the U.S, were preaching.
Liberal priests, most prominently Isaac Hecker, extolled the virtues of freedom and liberty as it related to the Church in the U.S. In his 1876 book, The Faith of Our Fathers, for example, Baltimore's James Cardinal Gibbons wrote of his country, '[T]here is no nation on the face of the earth where the Church is less trammeled, and where she has more liberty to carry out her sublime destiny, than in these Untied States.' Twelve years later, St. Paul's Archbishop John Ireland, proclaimed, 'In America, the Church is free—as the bird is free in the air to spread out its pinions and fly whithersoever it wills.'
Conservative critics, both in the U.S., and in the Vatican, viewed these liberal prelates with suspicion because of their openness to engage in inter-religious encounters. Testum indicates that Leo XIII wanted to make clear that the Catholic Church in the U.S. wasn't spiritually distinct from the global church, and couldn't go its own way. It showed that, while sympathetic to workers and inequality, he wasn't prepared to see Church doctrine or the power of the Vatican challenged.
Leo XIII's legacy, then, was one characterized by deep concern for the plight of workers and the poor, but also one that reflected concern over maintaining hierarchical discipline within the Church. He also wanted to moderate any spiritual experimentation, however illusory in the case of Americanism, that may have suggested the potential for Catholics to stray too far from Church teachings.
What the History of Saint Augustine Can Teach us About Pope Leo XIV
Despite setting limits on the autonomy of the American Church, the social teachings of Leo XIII had enormous influence on Catholicism in the U.S., especially after the horrors of World War I. The National Catholic Welfare Council (now the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, or the USCCB) gave its full support to the philosophy laid down by Pope Leo XIII in Rerum. In 1919, the Council adopted a Program of Social Reconstruction, which supported the institution of living wages, public pensions, and a variety of other government-provided aids for working men and women.
In the following decades, numerous labor priests, such as John A. Ryan, George G. Higgins, Philip A. Carey, Joseph F. Donnelly, and Charles Owen Rice, led the way in advocating for workers. They instructed workers about Catholic social teaching, and operated labor schools to educate them on their rights and on the Catholic Church's positions on the important economic and social issues presented by the Great Depression and World War II. The Catholic Worker movement, led by Dorothy Day and Peter Maurin, was but one prominent example of the impact and the implementation of Catholic social teaching outside of theology courses and on American city streets. It provided charitable relief and practiced communal labor through its houses of hospitality, which Day envisioned would bring "workers and scholars together' in a place where they could 'discuss Christian principles of organization as set forth in the encyclicals.'
Over time, American Catholicism has become fractured between theological conservatives and liberals. Today, the divides increasingly intersect with broader partisan battles outside the Church. In this landscape, Catholic social teaching and debates over the compatibility of Catholicism and Americanism are not mere historical relics of a previous century. They are vital issues that played formative roles in shaping the contemporary Catholic Church that Leo XIV now leads.
Whether the new Pope chose the name Leo XIV to signal his affinity for Leo XIII is probably something only he knows. Yet, in so much as it does, it may indicate both that the new Pontiff is interested in economic matters, especially the struggles of working men and women to scrape by, and the ever-present debates over freedom versus order and the meaning of liberty in a hierarchical institution like the Church. The choice of his name may suggest that while Leo XIV will thrill liberal Catholics on social justice issues, he may lean more toward the Church's conservative wing when it comes to maintaining doctrinal boundaries.
William S. Cossen is a historian of American religion and nationalism, and the author of Making Catholic America: Religious Nationalism in the Gilded Age and Progressive Era .
Made by History takes readers beyond the headlines with articles written and edited by professional historians. Learn more about Made by History at TIME here. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of TIME editors.
Write to Made by History at madebyhistory@time.com.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


New York Post
10 minutes ago
- New York Post
Who's REALLY ‘destroying democracy' — after failing to win voters legitimately?
'Destroying democracy' — the latest theme of the left — can be defined in many ways. How about attempting to destroy constitutional, ancient and hallowed institutions simply to suit short-term political gains? So, who in 2020, and now once again, has boasted about packing the 156-year-old, nine-justice Supreme Court? Who talks frequently about destroying the 187-year-old Senate filibuster — though only when they hold a Senate majority? Who wants to bring in an insolvent left-wing Puerto Rico and redefine the 235-year-old District of Columbia — by altering the Constitution — as two new states solely to obtain four additional liberal senators? Who is trying to destroy the constitutionally mandated 235-year Electoral College by circumventing it with the surrogate 'The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact?' Does destroying democracy also entail weaponizing federal bureaucracies, turning them into rogue partisan arms of a president? So who ordered the CIA to concoct bogus charges of 'collusion' to sabotage Donald Trump's 2016 campaign, the 2016-2017 transition, and the first 22 months of Trump's first term? Who prompted a cabal of '51 former intelligence officials' to lie to the American people on the eve of the last debate of the 2020 election that the FBI-authenticated Hunter Biden laptop was instead the work of a 'Russian intelligence operation?' Who ordered the FBI to connive and partner with social-media conglomerates to censor accurate news deemed unhelpful to the 2020 Biden campaign? Who pulled off the greatest presidential coup in history by using surrogates in the shadows to run the cognitively debilitated Biden presidency, then by fiat canceled his reelection effort and finally anointed as his replacement the new nominee Kamala Harris, who had never won a single primary delegate? Who ordered FBI SWAT teams to invade the home of a former president because of a classification dispute over 102 files out of some 13,000 stored there? Who tried to remove an ex-president and leader of his party from at least 25 state ballots to deprive millions of Americans of the opportunity to vote for or against him? Who coordinated four local, state and federal prosecutors to destroy a former and future president by charging him with fantasy crimes that were never before, and will never again be, lodged against anyone else? Who appointed a federal prosecutor to go after the ex-president, who arranged for a high-ranking Justice Department official to step down to join a New York prosecutor's efforts to destroy an ex-president, and who met in the White House with a Georgia county prosecutor seeking to destroy an ex-president — all on the same day — a mere 72 hours after Trump announced his 2024 reelection bid? Who but the current Democrats ever impeached a president twice? Has any party ever tried an ex-president in the Senate when he was out of office and a mere private citizen? When have there ever been two near-miss assassination attempts on a major party presidential candidate during a single presidential campaign? Who destroyed the southern border and broke federal law to allow in, without criminal or health background audits, some 10 million to 12 million illegal aliens? Who created 600 'sanctuary jurisdictions' for the sole purpose of nullifying federal immigration law, in the eerie spirit of the renegade old Confederacy? Who allowed tens of thousands of rioters, arsonists and violent protesters over four months in 2020 to destroy over $2 billion in property, kill some 35 people, injure 1,500 police officers and torch a federal courthouse, a police precinct and a historic church — all with de facto legal impunity? How do the purported destroyers of democracy find themselves winning 60% to 70% approval on most of the key issues of our times, while the supposed saviors of democracy are on the losing side of popular opinion? How does a president 'destroy democracy' by his party winning the White House by both the popular and Electoral College vote, winning majorities in both the Senate and House by popular votes and enjoying a 6-3 edge in the Supreme Court through judges appointed by popularly elected presidents? So what is behind these absurd charges? Three catalysts: One, the new anguished elitist Democratic Party alienated the middle classes through its Jacobin agenda and therefore lost the Congress, the presidency and the Supreme Court, and now has no federal political power. Two, the Democratic Party is polling at record lows and yet remains hellbent on alienating the traditional sources of its power — minorities, youth and Independents. Three, Democrats cannot find any issues that the people support, nor any leaders to convince the people to embrace them. So it is no surprise that the panicked Democrats bark at the shadows — given that they know their revolutionary, neo-socialist agenda is destroying them. And yet, like all addicts, they choose destruction over abandoning their self-destructive fixations. Victor Davis Hanson is a distinguished fellow of the Center for American Greatness.


The Hill
10 minutes ago
- The Hill
Pence: ‘I fully support' Trump's deployment of National Guard to DC
Former Vice President Pence said on Sunday he 'fully' supports President Trump's approach to combating crime in Washington, D.C., through his recent crackdown on the nation's capital. 'I welcome his decision to deploy the National Guard and essentially federalize the D.C. Police Department. I know that it's all now working in a very cooperative way,' Pence said in an interview on CNN's 'State of the Union.' 'I think it's important what the president is doing. I fully support it. And I think the American people welcome the president taking decisive action to ensure the streets of our nation's capital are safe and also continues to provide resources across the country to make all of our cities and towns and communities safe,' Pence added. The National Guard started ramping up its presence in Washington on Thursday, deploying troops to the National Mall and Metro stations after the president announced the move earlier in the week in what he portrayed as a crackdown on crime in the nation's capital. The White House said more than 1,600 personnel were involved in operations across the city on Wednesday, making 45 arrests, mostly targeting immigrants who lacked permanent legal status. While the Guard had a relatively small footprint in the city earlier this week, by Thursday, all of the roughly 800 Army and Air National Guard troops Trump ordered to the streets had mobilized for duty, the Pentagon confirmed. On Saturday, South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster (R) announced the deployment of 200 National Guard troops to Washington, just hours after West Virginia Gov. Patrick Morrisey (R) announced between 300 and 400 National Guard troops would be traveling to the nation's capital.

41 minutes ago
Draft of new 'MAHA' report suggests RFK Jr. won't target pesticides
The draft of an upcoming government report suggesting ways to improve the health of American children does not recommend severe restrictions on pesticides and ultra-processed foods, according to a copy of the document obtained by ABC News. The draft's language, if left unchanged, would constitute a win for the agriculture industry and a potential setback for Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and his "Make America Healthy Again" (MAHA) allies, who have railed against the use of chemical additives in America's food supply, arguing that they harm children. A person familiar with the draft cautioned that the language could still change before it's released to the public. "Unless officially released by the administration, any document purporting to be the MAHA report should be dismissed as speculative literature," White House deputy press secretary Kush Desai said in response to ABC News' request for comment. An HHS spokesperson declined to verify the document's authenticity. The New York Times first reported details of the new draft report. The report will be the second "MAHA" report released by the Trump administration following one published in May. Both were composed by officials in the White House and across different federal agencies, including Kennedy's HHS. The May report detailed the factors officials said were worsening the health of American children and called for a second report, within 100 days, to recommend policies to address those factors. The earlier report -- which was dogged by the revelation that some studies it cited were nonexistent -- cited damning statistics about the effect of chemical food additives, tying them to cancer and developmental disorders. The draft of the new report does not signal any intention to eliminate pesticides from America's food. Instead, the draft calls for "more targeted and precise pesticide applications" and research programs that would "help to decrease pesticide volumes." The report also stated the Environmental Protection Agency "will work to ensure that the public has awareness and confidence in EPA's robust pesticide review procedures and how that relates to the limiting of risk for users and the general public." Regarding ultra-processed foods, the new report states only that HHS, the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Food and Drug Administration would work to develop a "government-wide definition for 'ultra-processed food.'" In his January confirmation hearing, Kennedy declared that "something is poisoning the American people, and we know that the primary culprits are changing food supply, a switch to highly chemical intensive processed foods." Meanwhile, some "MAHA" influencers have loudly demanded changes to the country's food supply, putting their faith in Kennedy to leverage his position of power to uproot the agriculture industry. But this summer, agriculture groups lobbied intensely against the inclusion of anti-pesticide recommendations in the new report. They appeared to find an ally in Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins, who indicated to reporters this month that the upcoming report would spare pesticides. "There is no chance that our current system of agriculture can survive without those crop protection tools," she said at a press conference in a Washington. "I feel very confident that his, and our, commitment to make sure that farmers are at the table remains paramount, and that the report will reflect that."