American author, speaker, and theologian Bishop Robert Baron was present in the Vatican recently to witness the election of a new Pope. He shared his insights with various media outlets regarding the “fascinating” choice of Cardinal Robert Prevost as Pope Leo XIV.
The name a Pope chooses often carries significant meaning, reflecting on how they see their role in leading the Catholic Church. Typically, a Pope picks names of predecessors they admire or aim to emulate. In this case, Prevost opted for Leo XIV, in tribute to Pope Leo XIII, who had a notable tenure from 1878 to 1903.
“He could have chosen Francis II, signaling continuity with Francis’ approach. Or perhaps John Paul III, which would suggest a more conservative stance. If he had gone with John XXIV, we might have viewed him as quite the progressive,” Baron noted. “Returning to such an important figure shows that the new Pope seeks a thoughtful interaction with the modern world—not just a blanket rejection or acceptance, but a nuanced engagement.”
Baron also expected Cardinal Dolan to characterize Pope XIV as a “citizen of the world” capable of bridging divides, including those with figures like Trump.
He remarked on how Leo XIII played a crucial role during a time of immense political and philosophical turmoil in the 18th and 19th centuries, coping with the rise of ideologies like Marxism as well as the impacts of significant events like the French and American Revolutions.
“Initially, the Church’s response was quite negative—it was a firm ‘no’ to modernity. But by the end of the 19th century, with some distance and critical thought, it became more about finding creative ways to engage with modernity. Pope Leo XIII represented that shift,” he explained.
Baron pointed to Rerum Novarum, an encyclical published by Pope Leo XIII in 1891, to underscore his points.
“That document firmly opposed Marxism, socialism, and communism, while advocating for private property and a market economy. Yet, at the same time, it also strongly supported the rights of workers to form unions and emphasized a universal purpose for goods,” he added.
“He even suggested that when your basic needs are met, whatever you have left belongs to the poor. That’s not just the conventional viewpoint—it’s refreshingly innovative. It illustrates a delicate balance: a ‘yes’ to private property, but also a ‘no’ to socialism and Marxism.”
In summary, Baron views Prevost’s selection of Leo XIV as an intriguing contributor to the conversation around the political left and right.
“Baron believes figures like Leo XIV don’t easily fit into our conventional left-right dichotomy, which makes him particularly interesting in today’s landscape,” he concluded.
