LEO – WHAT’S IN A NAME?
Ever heard of Rerum Novarum? J.D won’t like it.
Pope Leo XIII
So the college of cardinals has chosen a pope from the USA. Hmmm! No American Pope for more than 2000 years then along comes … one. Why would that be now?
In fairness (we do say that a lot in Ireland, in fairness, because we’re a very fair people - except when it comes to Eng … never mind) … anyway, in fairness, I suppose for the first 1492 years Catholics didn’t even know that there was an America. And for the first 1776 years the election of a pope from the United States of America wasn’t a thing either. But, you know, 267 Popes and only one American. Why is that then?
Well it probably has something to do with the fact that 217 out of the 267 Popes were Italian. For the record, seventeen of the rest were French, nine Greeks, six Syrians and four Germans. We’re not very fond of the only English Pope in Ireland, by the way. He was Pope Adrian IV, born Nicholas Breakspear. That’s because in a Papal bull in 1155 he basically handed Ireland over to the English king, Henry II. It took us nearly 800 years to put that bull back in its barn.
Anyway – there, said it again – what’s in a name? Cardinal Robert Prevost that was, is now Leo XIV. Why did he chose to spend the rest of his life as a Leo? He’s actually a Virgo. I mean the star sign obviously. Would it have anything to do with the record of the last Pope who went by that name? If that is the case then it’s not going to please the second most important Roman Catholic in the world. That would clearly be the recent convert, Vice President J.D. Vance.
So who and what was Leo XIII?
Well the first thing you have to say about him is that he can’t have been superstitious. He was definitely not triskaidekaphobic (come on, you shouldn’t have to look it up). Or else he thought the Roman numerals (XIII) were a protection against the ‘curse of thirteen’, in which, let’s face it, the first Pope, Peter, played a significant (one thirteenth) role. (It was a Last Supper thing).
Why will J.D. have a hard time with Leo XIV if he turns out to be anything like Leo XII—aside from that ‘J.D. Vance is wrong’ tweet?
Two words. Rerum Novarum.
Apologies that they are Latin words but that’s what you get for being popey. Translated, rerum novarum, means ‘revolutionary change’ but not the kind of change J.D. is watching his boss Mr. Trusk, initiating at the moment. Rerum Novarum—hey, let’s just call it Revolutionary Change, for the craic— was a papal encyclical issued by Pope Leo XIII in 1891. The clue to its content is in the subtitle, ‘Rights and Duties of Capital and Labour’ (or Labor if you’re an American Pope).
I mean, come on, who knew Capital had duties?
Well, apparently a nineteenth century Pope did. The encyclical condemned ‘the misery and wretchedness pressing so unjustly on the majority of the working class’. While it condemned socialism (sorry Bernie) it supported the right of workers to join trade unions. Remember them? The used to look after the rights of workers (sorry Jeff). Revolutionary Change even declared that one of the roles of the state was to protect the rights of its citizens. That is just soooo 19th century.
Hey, maybe Cardinal Prevost just liked the name Leo. Maybe he’s never heard of Rerum Novarum. But if an old atheist like me knows about it, I suspect that one of the smartest and most able prelates in the Roman Catholic church probably does too. And maybe, just maybe, he’s trying to draw our attention to it by becoming the next Pope Leo, after its author.
Could that be what’s in a name? Just guessing.
So, perhaps J.D. and Leo might not end up as best buddies, and because Leo is only 69 J.D. is less likely to impact this Pope in quite the same way he seems to have done with Francis. (Hey – I DID NOT say he killed him, right!)
Or, who knows, maybe Leo XIV will suddenly become Peruvian.