What we know about Leo XIV, the new American pope
The Catholic Church has a new pope.
American Cardinal Robert Prevost has been elected the 267th pontiff. He has chosen the name Leo XIV, a senior cardinal deacon announced.
The 69-year-old Chicago native is the first American pope and is seen as a diplomat in the church.
MORE: Papal conclave live updates
Following the death of Pope Francis on April 21, the 133 cardinals -- the church's highest-ranking clergy -- gathered to elect a new pope for the Catholic Church in the secret conclave in Rome.
On Thursday afternoon local time, white smoke billowed from the chimney atop the Sistine Chapel and the bells of St. Peter's Basilica rang out, signifying the cardinals had elected a new pope. The cardinals cast at least four ballots at the Vatican before a cardinal received at least two-thirds of the vote.
Over an hour after the white smoke emerged, the new pope, clad in his papal vestments, stepped onto the balcony of St. Peter's Basilica and greeted the world.
He mentioned Pope Francis twice and explicitly said he wants to pick up where the late pope left off on that very balcony on Easter, before giving the Urbi et Orbi blessing -- meaning to "the city and the world."
"We have to be a church that works together to build bridges and to keep our arms open, like this very piazza, welcoming," Leo told the crowd while speaking in Italian.
His full authority and jurisdiction begin immediately upon his acceptance of the office, prior to the public announcement.
MORE: Could an American pope be waiting in the wings? Experts weigh in
Leo is the fifth-most-popular name chosen by popes.
The director of the Holy See told reporters Thursday that the name is a "direct reference to Leo XIII," the last pope to take the name Leo.
Pope Leo XIII, who headed the Catholic Church from 1878 until his death in 1903, was a founding figure of the Catholic social justice tradition.
He is known for his encyclical "Rerum Novarum," meaning "Of New Things," which is "considered to be the foundation for the modern social doctrine of the Church," the Holy See director said.
Pope Leo XIII, who headed the Catholic Church from 1878 until his death in 1903, was a founding figure of the Catholic social justice tradition.
"Looking to the history, Leos were strong popes," Father Vito Crincoli told ABC News on Thursday. "Like Leo XIII, he loved his people. He loved his people. His people, he considered man not a machine. A man's work was a reflection of his dignity."
"We don't know this yet, but it'd be really interesting to know why he took the name Leo," he said of Pope Leo XIV.
While popes aren't obliged to change their name, every pontiff for the past 470 years has done so, usually choosing the name of a predecessor to both honor them and signal their intention to emulate his example. Pope Francis was a notable exception, choosing not the name of a former pope but that of St. Francis of Assisi, the 13th century cleric and patron saint of animals and the environment.
Pope Leo started to emerge as a front-runner for the papacy in the days before the conclave began, according to the Rev. James Martin, a papal contributor to ABC News.
Following the announcement of the new pope, Martin told ABC News on Thursday that he knows Leo, describing him as "very down-to-earth" and a "very kind person, very reserved."
Pope Leo was the only U.S. cardinal on a short list of front-runners for pope, also known as "papabiles," compiled in the aftermath of Pope Francis' death by The Associated Press.
In addition to being the first pope from the United States, Leo is the first Augustinian friar to be elected pontiff.
He graduated from Villanova University, the only Augustinian Catholic university in the nation, in 1977.
"As an Augustinian Catholic institution, we celebrate this significant day for our University community and the global Church," the Rev. Peter Donohue, the university's president, said in a statement Thursday. "Villanova, built on the teachings of St. Augustine, has always been grounded in advancing a deeper understanding of the fundamental relationship between faith and reason -- between spirituality and wisdom. With today's election of His Holiness, Pope Leo XIV, I cannot help but reflect on what his Augustinian papacy will mean to our University community and our world. Known for his humility, gentle spirit, prudence and warmth, Pope Leo XIV's leadership offers an opportunity to reaffirm our commitment to our educational mission."
Leo entered the novitiate of the Order of Saint Augustine in the province of Our Lady of Good Counsel, in Saint Louis, in 1977, according to his bio on the Vatican Press website.
He earned a diploma in theology from the Catholic Theological Union of Chicago in 1982. He went on to study canon law at the Pontifical Saint Thomas Aquinas University and received priestly ordination on June 19, 1982, according to his bio.
After receiving his licentiate in 1984, he was sent to work in the mission of Chulucanas, in Piura, Peru, from 1985 to 1986.
He mostly served in Peru until returning in the late 1990s to Chicago, where he was elected to lead the Augustinians' Midwest province in 1999. He was subsequently twice elected prior general, or top leader, of the Augustinian religious order.
Francis brought Pope Leo to work at the Vatican after first appointing him in 2014 to serve as the bishop of Chiclayo, Peru. He has spent the majority of his time in Peru, where he has also worked as a teacher, missionary and parish priest. During his remarks from the balcony of St. Peter's Basilica on Thursday, Leo spoke briefly in Spanish and greeted the Diocese of Chiclayo in Peru specifically.
In April 2020, Francis appointed him to be the apostolic administrator of the diocese of Callao, also in Peru, his profile said.
Since 2023, he has held the position at the Vatican as Prefect of the Dicastery for Bishops, in charge of vetting nominations for bishops around the world.
MORE: 'Habemus papum': Here's what happens immediately after a new pope is chosen
Pope Leo told Vatican News in October 2024 that a "bishop is not supposed to be a little prince sitting in his kingdom, but rather called authentically to be humble, to be close to the people he serves, to walk with them and to suffer with them."
He also currently serves as the president of the Pontifical Commission for Latin America.
In a 2023 interview with the Catholic News Service, he was asked how he responds to problems with bishops or dioceses -- to which he said he reminds clergymen to reflect on their oath to "live and work in communion with the Holy Father."
"The spirit of synodality includes a need and desire to listen to not only the bishop himself, but to many people in the diocese to see what's the best way to promote authentic church in each and every diocese in the world," he said at the time.
What we know about Leo XIV, the new American pope originally appeared on abcnews.go.com
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
15 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
A Trump family project spurs resignations and a criminal charge in Serbia
Advertisement In November, one week after Trump won reelection, the Serbian government greased the skids by declaring that the site — a bombed-out building that serves as an icon to Serbians' suffering during a 1999 conflict — was no longer considered a culturally protected asset. That paved the way for the Trump family project. Dozens of architects and cultural historians at the state-run Republic Institute for the Protection of Cultural Monuments cried foul, accusing the government of violating the law. Several days after the government's decision, they fired off a letter saying the property's status as an 'immovable cultural property' could be revoked only if a team of the institute's experts approved it. And they hadn't. 'From the beginning, we knew it was a political decision,' said Estela Radonjic Zivkov, the institute's former deputy director. She said she was pressured by state intelligence officers not to challenge the government on this case, a clear sign of Serbian leaders' intense interest in the project. She did so anyway. Advertisement Now, seven months later, the Trump family project has become both a Serbian scandal and a glaring example of just how far a foreign government was willing to go to further the financial interests of Trump's family. And it underscores recurring concerns that the family's business dealings have become harder to separate from Trump's official decisions. Serbian college students who have been leading mass protests against Aleksandar Vucic, the country's strongman president, have seized on the development as an example of what they see as their government's corrupt ways. In late March, thousands demonstrated at the site. Last month, they and other critics celebrated a surprise victory. Serbia's organized crime prosecutor charged Goran Vasic, Zivkov's boss and the director of the cultural institute, with abuse of power. The prosecutor's office said Vasic had admitted falsifying a document to justify stripping the site of its protected status. No one knows how far the inquiry will go. But one question that has been publicly raised is whether Sinisa Mali, Serbia's powerful finance minister, pressured cultural heritage officials to either back the project or resign. Mali has ties to the White House through Richard Grenell, a longtime Trump ally and the current envoy for special missions. Mali has declined to comment on the project, citing the continuing investigation. Affinity Partners, Kushner's company, says the deal is under review. Vucic has minimized the criminal inquiry, saying that 'there was not any kind of forgery.' Advertisement Steven Cheung, the White House communications director, has said that 'everything President Trump does is to benefit the American people.' Vucic's office did not respond to a request for comment, but the Serbian leader said last year that he 'died laughing' at the notion that 'I used this for political influence on Trump.' As far back as 2013, Donald Trump was eyeballing the Belgrade site for a hotel. The idea arose again in his first term as president. Grenell, who then was Trump's troubleshooter for the fractious relationship between Serbia and Kosovo, encouraged Serbian leaders to consider redeveloping the site with American investment. After Trump lost reelection in 2020, Grenell urged Kushner to take up the project and served as an early intermediary. Grenell met with the Serbian president in 2022 and 2023 and posted images of himself on social media with Mali in 2021. Grenell could not be reached for comment. By May 2024, the Serbian government struck a deal with a company affiliated with Kushner. It agreed to give the developers a 99-year, no-cost lease that could be converted to ownership, also free of charge, according to a draft agreement reviewed by The New York Times. In return for contributing the land, the Serbian government will receive 22 percent of the development's profits, according to people familiar with the deal. There was a hitch: The Institute for the Protection of Cultural Monuments wasn't going along. Dubravka Djukanovic, an architect and college professor who led the institute, was opposed to changing the site's protected status. In an interview, she said the complex, which was designed by a renowned Serbian modernist architect, should instead be restored and put to public use. Advertisement Last June, she said, she was summoned to a meeting with Mali. Olivera Vuckovic, director of a parallel city institute, was also summoned, according to a person familiar with the situation who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of job repercussions. Mali had a blunt message, that person said: Get behind the project or resign. Djukanovic said she swiftly resigned because of the meeting with Mali, but she declined to give further details because of the investigation. Vuckovic could not be reached for comment. The issue simmered for another six months, until after Trump won reelection. On Nov. 14, the Serbian government announced it had revoked the site's protected status. At the cultural institute, Zivkov, then the deputy director, said the staff immediately got to work on a letter saying that the government had 'grossly violated the Law on Cultural Heritage.' If the government trampled its own law in this case, the letter said, 'any cultural property that inconveniences an investor or poses a political or other obstacle may be erased in the same way.' It is unclear whether it was the letter from the institute's staff that prompted the criminal investigation. The institute's director was temporarily detained for questioning, then charged with abuse of power in mid-May. He has not yet appeared in court. Ian Brekke, the top lawyer for Affinity Partners, flew to Belgrade right after that news broke, according to a person familiar with the situation who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe confidential business matters. Serbian officials told him the controversy boiled down to a simple administrative error, the person said, but Kushner's team is still assessing the situation. Advertisement This article originally appeared in .
The Hill
19 minutes ago
- The Hill
Attorneys get more time to argue over contested copper mine on land sacred to Apaches
A U.S. district judge in Arizona has opened the door for the next round of legal wrangling as environmentalists and some Native Americas seek to stop the federal government from transferring land in Arizona for a massive copper mining project. Judge Dominic Lanza in a ruling issued Monday denied motions that sought to halt the transfer pending the outcome of the case. However, he did preclude the U.S. Forest Service from proceeding with the land exchange until 60 days after the agency issues a required environmental review. Lanza said that would give the parties more time to analyze the environmental report and file amended complaints. He said granting a preliminary injunction now would be premature since the review will differ in some ways from the one that spurred the legal challenge four years ago. 'It is unfortunate that the result of this order will be to force the parties to engage in another stressful, abbreviated round of briefing and litigation activity' when the new review is issued, he said, acknowledging the unusual circumstances. Attorneys for the federal government and the mining company agreed during a recent hearing to the 60-day delay. That time frame also is specified in the legislation that Congress passed and then-President Barack Obama signed in 2014 authorizing the exchange. The group Apache Stronghold, the San Carlos Apache Tribe and others welcomed more time to fight for Oak Flat, an area they consider as holy. 'In this critical moment, we call on the Trump administration and Congress to halt the transfer to a Chinese-owned mine, and honor what is sacred,' said Wendsler Nosie Sr., leader of Apache Stronghold. 'As we continue to fight in court, know this: Nothing will turn us away from defending the spiritual essence of our people, the lifeblood that connects us to the creator and this land.' A statement from Resolution Cooper said the ruling is consistent with prior decisions and gives the parties time to review the final environmental impact statement that will be issued later this month. 'We are confident the project satisfies all applicable legal requirements,' said Resolution president and general manager Vicky Peacey. She added that years of consultation with tribes and communities resulted in changes to the mining plan to reduce potential effects. The fight over Oak Flat dates back about 20 years, when legislation proposing the land exchange was first introduced. It failed repeatedly in Congress before being included in a must-pass national defense spending bill in 2014. San Carlos Apache Chairman Terry Rambler said Monday that the bill was not in the best interest of the American people, Arizona or his tribe. He said concerns persist about the mine's use of groundwater and the pending obliteration of the culturally significant site. Apache Stronghold and the tribe sued the U.S. government in 2021 to protect the place tribal members call Chi'chil Bildagoteel, which is dotted with ancient oak groves and traditional plants the Apaches consider essential to their religion. The U.S. Supreme Court recently rejected an appeal by the Apache group, letting lower court rulings stand. The project has support in nearby Superior and other traditional mining towns in the area. The company — a subsidiary of international mining giants Rio Tinto and BHP — estimates the mine will generate $1 billion a year for Arizona's economy and create thousands of jobs.
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Why The Planes Russia Lost In Ukraine's Drone Strike Are Such A Big Deal
Ukraine's Security Service (SBU) carried out a massive drone strike against Russia's military on June 1, specifically targeting the invading power's so-called strategic aircraft. These are amongst the most precious assets Russia has, and their loss represents a significant blow not just to the country's pride, but it's actual combat strength. That these attack were conducted so far inside of Russian territory doesn't merely add insult to injury, it massively expands the scope of its vulnerability. Codenamed Spiderweb, the Ukrainian operation involved smuggling 150 first-person view (FPV) drones into Russia, which were then hidden within the roofs of wooden cabins. The cabins were then hauled off by cargo trucks by hired Russian drivers who had no idea they'd become accomplices in a strike against their own country. Once those trucks were parked near the target airbases [Kyiv Post], the roofs were remotely opened, allowing the drones to leap out and kamikaze themselves into the parked planes. Reports indicate that a total of 117 drones assaulted four airbases across the breadth of Russia, damaging or destroying 41 aircraft. While this operation doesn't necessarily change the immediate situation on the ground of the war, it will leave a lasting impact on Russia and, very possibly, the future of warfare. It's a pretty big deal. Read more: These Are The Cheap Cars That Consumer Reports Actually Recommends Buying There are a lot of claims flying around about what planes exactly got hit, not all of which have been verified. Thus far, it seems like the losses definitely include Tupolev Tu-95s (pictured), Tupolev Tu22Ms, and Beriev A-50s. Tu-95s (called "Bears" by NATO) are relics from the 1950s; they don't even use jets, just old-school propellers. Roughly comparable to an American B-52, it is a slow but sturdy heavy bomber. The Tu-22M (called "Backfires") is also a heavy bomber, but has the distinction of being supersonic, capable of flying over Mach 3. They are both capable of firing cruise missiles, and in fact have done so throughout the Russo-Ukrainian War. Critically, they are also nuclear-capable, making them a central part of Russia's claim to superpower status. A-50s (called "Mainstays"), meanwhile, are airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) planes, analogous to the American E-3 AWACS. These are basically flying radar stations, able to detect enemy planes at vast distances and then coordinate friendly aircraft in the ensuing battle. Without them, fighters and bombers have to rely on their own (puny) on-board radar systems. If Russia ever wants to win an air battle, it needs its A-50s. There's a saying that fighter pilots make movies, but bomber pilots make history. Strategic bombers are the planes that can deliver huge payloads into a wide area, causing immense devastation. They're how you take out, say, an entire enemy military base. They are also one leg of the so-called nuclear triad, the name of the three ways one country can nuke another: By intercontinental ballistic missile (the big ones in the silos), by submarine, or, in this case, by strat bomber. To be a major global military power, you have to have a vast fleet of strat bombers. Without them, while you still might be able to conduct smaller strikes against smaller targets, you won't be able to seriously threaten hardened installations from the air, and your nuclear strike capability is curtailed. Operation Spiderweb, therefore, hasn't simply been "another" Ukrainian attack; it has struck a direct blow to Russia's ability to project military force at significant scale. That's bad enough for Russia on its own merits. But it's actually worse than it seems. So Russia has lost some important bombers. Surely, it will just replace them, right? Well, the country has just one small problem: It can't. The Tu-95 and Tu-22M are not even in production anymore, given that they are both Cold War relics. Russia's modern(ish) strat bomber is the supersonic Tu-160 (called "Blackjack", pictured), somewhat similar to America's B-1B Lancer. The catch is that Russia hasn't actually built a Tu-160 in years, and it won't be cheap or easy to get production back up and running again. That means the planes that Ukraine destroyed weren't just blows, but permanent blows. The little country has materially weakened the bigger one, not just for this war, but for the foreseeable future. By how much? According to Ukraine, Operation Spiderweb took out a whopping 34% of Russia's entire bomber fleet. One-third. Of its entire bomber fleet. That can't be replaced. To be fair, it's not yet clear how many of these planes were merely damaged, not destroyed. Some of them will likely be repaired. Then again, there are also unconfirmed reports that Spiderweb also hit some of the precious Tu-160s. If those are also getting taken out, Russia's biggest, most expensive, most devastating planes are getting bombed back into the stone age... by cheap drones. A Tu-160 heavy bomber costs about $500 million. A first-person view (FPV) drone, like the ones Ukraine used in Spiderweb, costs somewhere around $500. FPV drones are designed to be remote piloted using VR goggles so that you can see exactly what the drone sees, unlike more conventional camera drones that you might watch through your phone. This gives the operator a much more detailed view of where the drone is flying, making them a good choice for racing, exploring or, well, blowing up the nuclear strike capability of a major world power. Once smuggled into Russia in wooden cabins hauled by unsuspecting Russian truck drivers, the drones were controlled remotely by Ukraine's operatives via Russia's own 4G and LTE cell phone services. Good thing those airbases had excellent reception (or bad thing, if you're Russian). As kamikaze drones strapped with explosives, all the operators had to do was fly them straight at the strat bombers' most vulnerable points, and then, boom. For what it's worth, immediately after the attack, Russia claimed that it had captured these operators. Ukrainian officials found that interesting, as they replied by saying all the operators were already safely back in their home country. Operation Spiderweb may well be looked back on as a turning point in the development of warfare. The fact that a global world power's nuclear bombers, some of the most important and expensive assets it has, can be successfully destroyed by a couple of cheap drones signals a sea-change in the balance of combat power. Generally speaking, warplanes were considered broadly safe once parked back at their airbase; that's clearly no longer the case. Countries may have to start investing in hardened aircraft shelters, which will be hugely expensive at scale; simply slapping car tires on the bombers clearly isn't enough. In other words, military aircraft are now getting even more expensive to field, while cheap drones are only getting more capable. Meanwhile, on June 4, just three days after Operation Spiderweb, Ukraine's Military Intelligence (HUR) conducted a successful cyberattack against the United Aircraft Company, the manufacturer of the Tu-160 bomber and many other Russian planes. HUR made off with 4.4 gigabytes of classified information, leaving only one thing behind: a graphic image of a Russian plane being snatched by a (presumably Ukrainian) owl. First, strike the bombers; then, strike the bomber manufacturer. All with non-conventional weaponry. Traditional views of military hardpower are being upended by the creativity and heroism of Ukraine's defenders. The future of our world may depend on how other countries, including America, adapt to these lessons. Not surprisingly, Russian President Vladimir Putin has vowed to retaliate for Ukraine's daring attack. Indeed, on June 7, Russia launched a huge drone and missile strike across Ukraine, hitting the cities of Kyiv, Chernihiv, Lutsk, and others. On June 9, it then launched its single largest drone attack of the entire war; critically, it targeted an airbase far from the border, thus mirroring Spiderweb in that way. Still, let's be clear: "Single largest drone attack of the entire war" means 479 drones, or just nine more than the previous record-holding strike on May 31, before Spiderweb even happened. In other words, Russia is throwing everything it has at Ukraine on a weekly basis anyway; at least so far, its "retaliations" have been just another day at the office. Putin's war has been so brutal that there may not be much more he can really do. In the meantime, the ground war grinds on. Peace talks between the two sides in Istanbul continue, so far without much to show for it. The question for Putin is how much of a price he's willing to pay to keep the war going, in exchange for what gains. Spiderweb changes that calculus dramatically. Whether a dictator cares remains to be seen. Want more like this? Join the Jalopnik newsletter to get the latest auto news sent straight to your inbox... Read the original article on Jalopnik.
