What’s in a pope's name (and a dual nationality)?

The choice of name says a lot about the priorities of a new pope.

For example, Cardinal Bergoglio’s choice of name defined the style of his papacy—one of simplicity, apostolic poverty, and an aversion to pomp and hierarchy. For the Church, Francis of Assisi remains a ghost that continues to haunt it, reminding it of its origins among the poor and dispossessed.

Cardinal Robert Francis Prevost, who—unlike Bergoglio—appeared to the crowds in full papal regalia, has chosen the name Leo XIV. This may be an indication that the new pope is more focused on substance, without upsetting traditionalists on matters of symbolism.

The choice of name is being interpreted as a reference to the last Leo to reign in the Vatican—Leo XIII—who, in his 1891 encyclical Rerum Novarum, advocated for fair wages, better working conditions, and crucially, the right of workers to join trade unions. This is particularly significant at a time when working class people feel increasingly disenfranchised.

Leo XVIII was also a vocal advocate of disarmament at a time when rival European colonial powers were engaged in an arms race that ultimately led to World War I.

Sure, unlike Francis’ scathing and radical critique of capitalism and consumerism, Rerum Novarum was directed at the excesses of capitalism while upholding the “sacredness” of private property and remaining hostile to socialism. But it was a start. It also gave the nascent Labour Party in Malta a reference point in largely conservative societies that were alien to Marxist socialism.

Moreover, Leo XIII was an intellectual who, unlike his ultra-reactionary predecessors, was keen on engaging in a dialogue with modernity—albeit within the limits of an institution that remained largely reactionary at heart until the advent of Vatican Council II.

Perhaps, by choosing the name Leo, Prevost is signalling a Church more focused on its social mission—aligned with the teachings of Pope Francis, but rooted in a tradition with which even social conservatives can identify.

The greatest unknown remains Leo XIV’s stance on divisive social issues. The signs so far are mixed. For example, on the role of women in the Church, his track record includes appointing three women to the Dicastery for Bishops, which oversees the selection and appointment of bishops around the world. But he has also spoken against the ordination of women. How far the new pope is willing to address the fundamental inequality so evident in the all-male College of Cardinals could well be a defining aspect of his papacy. So too will be his outreach to same-sex couples—an issue which he has so far largely avoided. 

But just as names are significant, so too is the nationality aspect—in this case, dual nationality. Many have focused on his US citizenship, but equally important are his roots in the Peruvian Church.

Like Francis, he did not identify with liberation theology but was not its enemy, gaining a reputation for bridge-building in a divided Church. By addressing the crowd in Spanish, he also underlined his identification with the global South.

In this sense, it makes more sense to see Prevost as the second pope hailing from the Americas rather than the first U.S.-born pope. His emphasis on synodality and the role of local bishops suggests that the shift from Rome to local churches will continue under his leadership. His hybrid nationality is in itself highly symbolic in a world threatened by resurgent nationalisms.

Still, while Prevost was keen to emphasise his Latin American heritage, his US nationality matters. Just as in 1978 the Roman Catholic Church chose a pope from communist-ruled Poland—prioritising its challenge to communism—Pope Leo XIV’s accession may represent a challenge to the MAGA nationalism endorsed by traditionalists within the US Church.

Highly indicative was his retweeting of an article by theologian Kat Armas in The National Catholic Reporter, which challenged Vice President Vance’s interpretation of the theological concept ordo amoris—the "order of love"—which Vance had cited to justify restrictive immigration policies. The article emphasised that Christian love should be inclusive and compassionate, particularly towards migrants and the marginalised.

In this sense, it is clear that Pope Leo XIV may be a hard nut to crack for the Trump regime—someone who speaks truth to power while wearing the full papal regalia which turns on conservatives.

The choice of name also evokes Pope Leo the Great, the first Leo who presided over the Church during the disintegration of the Roman Empire, best remembered for convincing Attila the Hun to spare Rome from being sacked.

In the same spirit, the new pope may not refrain from directly engaging with world leaders, including Trump. It will be a dialogue fraught with risk—but one which Prevost could deploy to turn them away from their worst instincts.