The anniversary of Pope Leo XIV’s election last month generated lots of thoughtful but inconclusive analysis from mainstream Catholic commentators – and, on social media, far more heat than light. Traditionalists in particular have turned on each other. Some think Leo is quietly reversing the mistakes of his predecessor, or at least planning to do so. Others describe him as ‘Francis II’ or ‘Bergoglio in nicer vestments’.
I believe that the former position is closer to the truth. For example, although Leo has appointed both liberal and conservative bishops and often pays tribute to his predecessor, he has not followed Francis’s example of catapulting controversial progressives into major dioceses; nor has he bestowed red hats on non-cardinalatial sees occupied by his ideological allies. What many Leonine appointees have in common is expertise in canon law, applied inconsistently or bypassed under Francis. This points to a fundamental difference in the two popes’ styles of government – one more apparent to sociologists than to Vatican-watchers. For a better understanding of the contrast between Francis and Leo, we should look beyond theological sources – to the writings of a sex-obsessed agnostic German social theorist who died from the Spanish flu in 1920.
