(Rorate Caeli) — Robert Francis Prevost has become Pope Leo XIV. Before May 8, 2025, most people did not know the name Prevost, but now he is the chief shepherd of over a billion Catholics. Both orthodox Catholics and modernists have been celebrating, while there have been naysayers on both sides, too. This reflects the fact Prevost was touted as a “compromise candidate” and pushed by strong prelates on both sides. Both the orthodox and the modernists seem to think, or hope, that the new Pope actually leans more in their direction, with orthodox faithful especially being optimistic after his more traditional choice of papal attire and his orthodox first papal Mass. So, to put it crudely, the real question is: who got played?
To fully understand our new Pope it could help to look into his past statements, actions, and general career, starting with his recent rise in Rome.
The meteoric rise
A handful of excellent analysts did know to keep track of Prevost and to count him amongst the papabile since he was made a cardinal less than two years ago, shortly after he was made the new prefect of the Dicastery of Bishops. Before 2023 almost nobody had heard of him. Then Francis suddenly appointed him to be the new prefect, replacing Marc Ouellet, who had served since Pope Benedict had appointed him in 2010.
Ouellet himself was originally a moderate “conservative” and was one of the very few such prelates who was able to remain in office for a long time under Francis. Despite this “generous” treatment Francis gradually eroded his “de facto” authority, appointing his own loyalist, the Brazilian Ilson de Jesus Montanari, as the new secretary in late 2013, who served as Francis’ representative with outsized influence.
Sources indicated Francis wanted Montanari to become the new prefect for years, but he didn’t want the position. As such, Prevost was not Francis’ first, and possibly not even second or third, choice to be the new prefect (the same was rumored to be the case for Fernandez as the new prefect of the Dicastery of the Doctrine of Faith), since insiders suggested Cupich, and possibly even McElroy, were being considered for the job.
Montanari remained secretary and was rumored to have outsized influence. Additionally, American allies of Francis continued to sidestep the papal nuncio for the U.S. to push the promotion of radical bishops directly to Francis.
READ: Toward a more excellent way: speaking the truth in charity
This is why it’s odd to see Prevost being blamed for the appointment of McElroy to Washington, when it was liberal cardinals Cupich and Tobin who had fiercely lobbied for it. If Prevost was a radical progressive, wouldn’t he push for such promotions without any need for Cupich to meet Francis?
It seems clear that Prevost was promoted in the final phase of Francis’ pontificate, when various powerful prelates were struggling for influence and he acted modestly and professionally. When Francis was recovering temporarily, after he was discharged from the hospital and only able to occasionally meet with prelates like Prevost, and not Cupich, two new archbishops got appointed to the U.S. (McKnight and McGovern) who both have moderate-conservative rather than modernist profiles.
Similarly, the persecution of the pro-traditional French bishop Dominique Rey of Fréjus-Toulon was started under, and supported by, Ouellet and pushed by certain inimical French bishops, as well as by Parolin. Prevost inherited that problem.
Finally, the sacking of Bishop Strickland, starting with an apostolic visitation in June 2023, is arguably the only example where Prevost may have had an important role. Sources varied on whether Pope Francis ordered the visitation or Prevost, but Prevost likely had little choice as he was very new to his position, and with Strickland sometimes being harshly critical of Pope Francis on X (formerly Twitter). Strickland himself seems pleased, or at least not unhappy, with the election of Prevost.
Odd alliance of supporters
Pope Leo XIV was allegedly elected through strong support of the conservative block, specifically Cardinal Dolan, though he also did meet with Cardinal Burke in preparation for the conclave (he was seen outside the Burke apartment, in person, by a reporter of Corriere della Sera). This remained relatively hidden from the outside world, however. Initially, it was rumoured that scandal-ridden Cardinal Maradiaga from Honduras was pushing for his candidacy, but then Maradiaga left early. It was claimed that he was upset over the fact that dozens of cardinals appointed by Pope Francis were betraying the late pope.
Next, it was claimed that Prevost was supported both by the radical modernist Cupich and the moderate conservative Christophe Pierre. This odd mix of support serves as the perfect example for the mysterious profile Prevost enjoyed.
While Pierre has been viewed as an anti-traditionalist for the last few years, he’s actually a conservative who has a history of opposing contraception, civil unions for homosexuals, clergy involvement in left-wing politics and the appointment of liberal bishops. He started as nuncio to the U.S. in 2016 and displayed no hostility against traditionalism for at least five years. Even after Traditionis Custodes was released he wasn’t the first to enforce it harshly and in late 2022 ended up mainly acting on behalf of Rome.
Pierre and Cupich have been consistent opponents, especially on the appointment of American bishops, yet both prelates supported Prevost, possibly because he was a former colleague they had both worked with well.
Recent views as prefect
During his time as prefect, Prevost has played his cards close to the vest and did only a few interviews, from which only a superficial understanding of the man could be formed. He gave the appearance of someone who supported reform in continuity. Unlike Fernandez (prefect of the former Holy Office), he clearly worked according to established procedure and based on consensus, consulting the other members in the plenary. Francis had already appointed three women as members of the dicastery before appointing Prevost as prefect. Prevost somewhat downplayed their role.
When it came to greater lay involvement in the appointment of bishops, he clearly opposed real democratization and supported the traditional role of the nuncios with them merely consulting with more faithful before making recommendations.
His job profile for bishops irked some ultraconservatives, since with it he clearly tried to fit in with the new status quo under Francis, but he didn’t deny that bishops should uphold doctrine, merely stressing that presenting the love of Christ was even more crucial:
We are often preoccupied with teaching doctrine, the way of living our faith, but we risk forgetting that our first task is to teach what it means to know Jesus Christ and to bear witness to our closeness to the Lord. This comes first: to communicate the beauty of the faith, the beauty and joy of knowing Jesus. It means that we ourselves are living it and sharing this experience.
He did openly reject calls for the ordination of women as deacons and priests. On the heated debate on doctrinal authority for national episcopal conferences during the final phase of the Synod on Synodality in 2024 he expressed himself moderately and cautiously:
Each episcopal conference needs to have a certain authority in terms of saying, ‘How are we going to understand this [doctrine] in the concrete reality in which we are living?’ This is not to say that the episcopal conferences are going to be rejecting the teaching authority of the pope, but that they’re going to be applying it in the unique context in which they live.
‘The whole understanding of synodality is not that all of a sudden there is going to be a fully democratic, assembly-style way of exercising authority in the Church.’
‘The primacy of Peter and of the successors of Peter, the bishop of Rome, of the pope, is something which enables the Church to continue to live communion in a very concrete way.’
‘Synodality can have a great impact on how we are living in the Church, but it certainly takes nothing away from what we would call the primacy.’
READ: Unearthed video shows Pope Leo XIV discussing past tension with Francis
He even tried to clear up confusion regarding possible more radical proposals (which he rejected), emphasizing the original text spoke of “some kind of doctrinal authority” for bishops’ conferences rather than a more absolute form of doctrinal authority.
Ironically, he did not cite Belgian prayers for gay relationships or diverse applications of Amoris Laetitia as an example, but the African refusal to implement Fiducia Supplicans (both Francis and Fernandez wanted the authority on the document left to individual African bishops).
He interpreted Francis’ teachings on migrants in a nuanced manner and acknowledged the problems caused with them coming to various countries, yet wants to look for a humane solution.
It’s also claimed that he would have supported Francis allowing Communion for the divorced and remarried. This assertion appears to have started with the College of Cardinals Report and an EWTN citation, but it is not further sourced based on specific quotes, nor is it even specified when or how Prevost was supposed to have supported this. As bishop of Peru he isn’t known to have used Amoris Laetitia to allow the divorced and remarried to receive Communion. By the time he became prefect the controversy had died down for about five years.
He also took Ouellet’s place in working with Parolin and Ladaria in another attempt to try to halt the German Synodal Path in July 2023. After Fernandez replaced Ladaria there seems to have been a brief lull in the struggle with the German bishops, till early 2024 after Fernandez had been discredited due to the backlash against Fiducia Supplicans.
Finally, there have been many rumors from varying sources that he’d often celebrate the traditional Mass, even after Traditionis Custodes. This information has so far not been substantiated (if it is from a completely trustworthy source, Rorate will make it known – there is nothing so far.)
Deeper background
A Chicago native of mixed ancestry including Italian, French, Spanish, and Louisianan Creole, Prevost became an Augustinian and a priest in the early 1980s, earned a Licentiate of Canon Law in 1984 and then a Doctorate of Canon Law degree in 1987, went as a missionary to Peru, serving as chancellor of the Territorial Prelature of Chulucanas from 1985 to 1986, then left Peru to serve as vocation director and missions director of the Augustinian Province of Our Mother of Good Counsel (U.S. Midwest), in Olympia Fields, Illinois, and finally he returned to Peru where he spent over a decade in charge of the Augustinian seminary in Trujillo, taught canon law in the diocesan seminary, served as prefect of studies, and acted as judge in the regional ecclesiastical court.
Returning to the U.S. in 1998 he was elected as head of the Augustinians twice, serving from 2001 until 2013. He attended a synod in Rome in 2012 under Pope Benedict XVI, expressing himself critically regarding secular, anti-Catholic modern media and their promotion of abortion, euthanasia, and homosexuality. He was openly critical of both the homosexual lifestyle and so-called homosexual families. The closest thing to a spiritual intellectual inspiration seems to have been St. Augustine and conservative Cardinal Prosper Grech.
Pope Francis appointed him bishop of Chiclayo in Peru in 2014 (he had refused it twice previously). He did a good enough job that he ended up being elected as vice-president of the Peruvian bishops’ conference.
Insights from X
Meanwhile, in 2011 he also created an X (then called Twitter) account which he ended up using rather sparingly. He mainly followed Vatican News and similar channels related to the Vatican and to Augustinians. The two Catholic news outlets he followed were Cruxnow and EWTN (in multiple languages). He also ended up following his two American colleagues at the Dicastery of Bishops, Cupich and Tobin, but no other progressive prelates (except arguably Scicluna, who is mainly important for dealing with abuse).
Throughout 2011 and 2012 he posted positively regarding meeting with Pope Benedict, Archbishop Chaput and matters related to the Augustinian order.
Even after Francis was elected, his tone did not change at all throughout 2013 or 2014. He retweeted posts from Cardinal Scola, the conservative runner up during the 2013 conclave, he retweeted things related to Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI and he posted regarding Cardinal Francis George. As a Chicago native, Prevost met with George multiple times and appeared rather close to him, specifically during his final year. He even posted a birthday photo of George in a wheelchair.
His tweets showed consistent pro-life concerns with a rejection of abortion, euthanasia and artificial contraception, including the Obama administration’s contraception mandate.
FLASHBACK: Pope Leo XIV denounced media ‘sympathy’ for ‘abortion, homosexual lifestyle, euthanasia’
He also reposted posts from the Peruvian bishops’ conference critical of gender ideology and reaffirming the family consists of a father, a mother and their children. His only tweets on the Amoris Laetitia controversy was a retweet of an article from Catholic News Service which quoted Cardinal Schonbörn as saying Amoris Laetitia developed Church doctrine but didn’t change it, an explanation briefly popular amongst popesplainers, moderates and moderate conservatives.
When he posted pro-migrant or anti-racist stuff it was often from conservative prelates such as Cardinal DiNardo or Archbishop Gomez. Prevost only started to retweet things from Cupich in late 2016 and even at first rather sporadically then. In the lead-up to the 2016 presidential election he reposted only one critical tweet regarding Trump, in the summer of 2015, and it was a tweet by Cardinal Dolan.
He retweeted an EWTN post which blamed Hillary Clinton’s election loss on her ignoring pro-life voters.
And also reposted a tweet of James Martin, once in 2017, when he expressed his support for Syrian refugees.
He also retweeted a post that quoted Cardinal Müller’s critique of gender ideology.
The only noticeable shift was that he gradually tweeted more regarding the environment, migrants and helping the poor, while still posting on pro-life and pro-family issues, too. Finally, he also called for an end to the death penalty, though he did not call it impermissible.
Overall assessment
Overall he seems clearly orthodox on abortion, euthanasia, contraception, LGBT, the appointment of bishops and the ordination of women, while his stance on Communion for the divorced and remarried and priestly celibacy seem difficult to know with certainty. He also appears to hold to an orthodox understanding of the faith, being unchangeable and bishops being mere servants of it. His actual stance on migration appears somewhat moderate as well.
His real test cases will be:
*Dealing with the synod study groups and the developments towards the ecclesial assembly in 2028.
*Ensuring an orthodox pastoral response to polygamy in Africa.
*New curial and cardinal appointments; the Church needs new blood.
The last point is especially important: personnel is policy. If the new Pope can restore order in the Curia, he can restore order to the Church. If he has proper collaborators and is able to stop the heresies in Germany, normalcy can return to the Church and maybe then Traditionis Custodes and Amoris Laetitia will either be reinterpreted, or reapplied in an orthodox manner, or overruled altogether.
We can pray and hope.
Reprinted with permission from Rorate Caeli.
