(LifeSiteNews) — The choice of the name Leo XIV struck joy into the hearts of devotees of Leo XIII, the great pope who faced down both robber barons and socialists with his magisterial works expounding Catholic social teaching. Their hopes were confirmed when the Holy Father explained that he had taken the name “mainly because Pope Leo XIII in his historic Encyclical Rerum Novarum addressed the social question in the context of the first great industrial revolution.”
Before that clarification, LifeSiteNews reached out to Catholic philosopher Stephano Fontana, the Verona-based director of the Cardinal Van Thuân International Observatory on the Social Doctrine of the Church to ask him what he thought of the new pontiff’s choice of name.
At first, Fontana was reluctant to offer an opinion, saying it was unclear to which Leo the formal Cardinal Robert Prevost was referring. However, after the Holy Father gave his explanation on Sunday, the expert was pleased to offer the following reply:
Good evening. I return to you because in the meantime Leo XIV has clarified an aspect of the choice of name. He has said that there are many reasons, but the principal one is that Leo XIII had with Rerum novarum confronted the problems following from the first industrial revolution, but now the Social Doctrine of the Church is faced with the new phenomena of artificial intelligence with its serious consequences for the person and for work.
This clarification is very important for the following reasons:
- During the previous pontificate, the Social Doctrine of the Church (SDC) was abandoned for the following reasons: natural rights were denied and the new moral theology no longer allowed the traditional concept of natural moral law while the SDC is also based on these rational foundations; charity was placed above faith and pastoral approach above doctrine, so that Christians had to walk through life together with all others while no longer professing anything unique to offer to illuminate the way, no answer to give but only questions to pose; the two encyclicals considered social, Laudato sì and Fratelli tutti, were not in continuity with the traditional previous magisterium, both in approach and in content.
- If the reference to Leo XIII is not to be merely nominal, the revival of the SDC entails the revival of the whole patrimony of philosophical and theological thought in Catholic Tradition. Leo XIII wrote 9 social encyclicals, 8 of which provided the context in which Rerum novarum was placed. It would be interesting if Leo XVI revisited this entire patrimony, but it is still too early to tell.
- If this happened, it would be necessary to review many of the novelties of theology, especially of moral theology, post-conciliar and contemporary, both through targeted interventions by the magisterium and by reviewing formation in the seminaries and pontifical universities, including the John Paul II institute.
For the time being, however, it must be said that the clarification is of great interest.
In an attached document, translated and published below, the philosopher expounded further on what the new pope’s priorities could mean for a renewal of the Social Doctrine of the Church:
Speaking to the cardinals, Leo XIV satisfied, at least in part, questions about the reasons for his choice of name, expressed in this fashion: “Sensing myself called to continue in this same path (followed by Francis), I thought to take the name Leo XIV. There are different reasons for this, but mainly because Pope Leo XIII in his historic Encyclical Rerum novarum addressed the social question in the context of the first great industrial revolution. And today, the Church offers to everyone the treasury of her social teaching in response to another industrial revolution and to developments in the field of artificial intelligence that pose new challenges for the defence of human dignity, justice and labor.”
How to evaluate this reference to the Social Doctrine of the Church? At first glance, we can do so in a positive fashion. I recently published an article arguing that during the pontificate of Francis, the Social Doctrine of the Church was completely set aside, so this revival is welcome, even if it is only a hint at the moment. And in this case, as with the other statements of Pope Leo in these first days of his pontificate, we must wait for concrete developments.
In the specific case of the Social Doctrine of the Church, there are above all three aspects that need to be made clear.
The first is what this reference to Leo XIII and Rerum novarum will consist of, namely how much and what will be taken from his teaching. Is it just a generic reference to the founder of the Social Doctrine of the Church in the modern age, or does he (Leo XIV) mean to take up in a specific manner some aspects of his (Leo XIII’s) teaching? Everyone who refers to Social Doctrine cites Leo XIII but then (often) reassesses the great part of his thought as not suitable for the times or in any case in need of further study. We can call to mind one of the most relevant cases: John Paul II, commemorating Rerum novarum in Laborem exercens, reiterates that there is no solution to the social question outside the Gospel, thus confirming the text of Leo XIII. But when he (John Paul II) turns to the rights of the worker to holiday rest, he doesn’t mean it anymore as a public worship of God, but as an expression of religious liberty. The two things can be difficult together.
The second aspect of the reference to Leo XIII is that Rerum novarum was not an isolated encyclical but set in a wide body of thought which considered the correct philosophy to adopt, the foundations of civil authority, the rights of the Catholic faithful, political liberty, the nature of democracy, the existence of a natural order in things concerning social life, relations between politics and religion, and so on. Augusto Del Noce said that Leo XIII was the greatest Catholic philosopher of the nineteenth century, and that if we remove Rerum novarum from this context of thought, it is incomprehensible. Will the new Leo take this into account?
A third and last aspect concerns continuity with Francis. This continuity was already evident during the first speech from the loggia, during the Blessing on May 8, as we have observed elsewhere. In the meetings of the following days, in particular in the meeting with the cardinals, this continuity was amply repeated in an articulate way, namely recollecting a few lines from the Francis pontificate. However, in many ways that pontificate was contrary to the Social Doctrine of the Church as such. If Leo means to repeat the whole proceeding pontificate, that is, a theological and magistral outline reinterpreted in continuity, he will have great difficulty in reviving the Social Doctrine of the Church as he says he wants to do — at least, if he is not to transform it, but in that case the reference to Leo XIII would lose its weight.
READ: Rebuilding the Church after Francis will be a ‘long and complex’ task: Catholic philosopher
Mr. Fontana’s writings were translated from the original Italian by Dorothy Cummings McLean.
