Commentary 25/05/26 A polyglot pope, rancor over liturgy, and world peace - By Robert

[성기화 요셉]

Leo, already established as a polyglot fluent in Italian, should not hesitate to use English and increasingly make it the dominant language at the Vatican.

Pope Leo XIV presides over Mass in the chapel of the Dicastery for Bishops.

By Robert Mickens

Published: May 26, 2025 04:44 AM GMT

Updated: May 26, 2025 05:32 AM GMT

Part II

Read the first part of this article

The late Pope Francis was a master communicator. He had a very high emotional IQ and could read his audience within seconds. However, his desire to handle press and public relations independently led to a severe mismanagement of the Vatican’s communications operations, sidelining a costly and professionally trained media apparatus. This was a significant mistake.

Leo now has the opportunity and responsibility to correct this colossal error. Moreover, he possesses a unique communications skill set, unlike any of his predecessors in a very long time, to achieve this.

Francis did not speak any languages aside from Italian and Spanish. Leo, in contrast, is a polyglot. He is fluent in Spanish, French, and, clearly, Portuguese. Unlike most other "American" priests and bishops who studied in Rome, he speaks Italian almost flawlessly. He has already established that.But his greatest linguistic asset is that he is a native English speaker. He can and must leverage this to its fullest potential because English is currently the undisputed lingua franca in the world.

Obviously, this makes many Italians in the Roman Curia extremely anxious, as they have historically used their language to control operations in the Vatican and, by extension, much of the Catholic world (or at least its hierarchy).Shy and introverted, Leo lacks the charisma and natural communicative skills with which his Argentine predecessor was so evidently blessed.

Thus, it is imperative that he take full advantage of the benefits that his native English language affords him.For example, when he makes appeals for world peace or issues other important messages related to global concerns, he must do so in English. Or even in Spanish. Italian is not effective. It is a language spoken by only 60-some million people, only about half or fewer of whom are even remotely interested in what he has to say.When the Pope appeals for peace in Ukraine or the Middle East, for instance, it will be more effective if he does so in English. Then his words will be broadcast around the world in his own voice rather than that of someone translating or talking over him.

Do you want more proof of why English is important in today's world? Consider the example of the United Nations in Geneva. This city in Switzerland is French-speaking, but in the UN offices, French is rarely used for official business; English is. That's because the United Nations is an international organization, just like the Catholic Church. It is not merely an Italian entity.

Instead, it is universal and global—especially after the 12-year pontificate of Francis, who worked tirelessly to free the Church from its Eurocentric ethos and identity. A pope must take advantage of speaking a language that reflects this if he has the ability and opportunity.Leo, already established as a polyglot fluent in Italian, should not hesitate to use English and increasingly make it the dominant language at the Vatican. This will be crucial to his effectiveness as a global voice of conscience and peace.The Russian invasion of Ukraine and prospects for peacePope Francis's approach to the Russian invasion of Ukraine was extremely problematic. He tried to remain above the fray and not take sides. But by doing this, he refused for a very long time to publicly acknowledge that Russia had broken international law, binding since the end of World War II, that prohibits the conquest of other nations' territory.

Pope Leo, in contrast, has opposed the Russian invasion from the very beginning. Interestingly, the first world leader he spoke to after his election as pope was Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Even before he became pope, then-Cardinal Prevost maintained that there must be a just and lasting peace to end the Russian-Ukrainian war. This likely indicates that he stands against any territorial claims made by Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Ever since Russia's invasion, the Holy See has offered its good offices to help negotiate a peaceful solution to the conflict.

But as it has been argued here before, there is no longer a place for the pope or the Vatican in this enterprise. The Holy See, which has one of the oldest diplomatic operations in the world, has lost most of the power or influence it once had, even though its officials continue to be in denial about this.Nonetheless, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni has tried to draw Leo into peace negotiations by suggesting (without any public admission by the pope) that he is open to hosting talks between Russia and Ukraine.Part of this plan is that the US president, Donald Trump, would be involved in any such talks. However, Leo is surely aware that there is no such thing as negotiations with Trump or Putin. As well-known sociopaths and pathological liars, these two men know only how to exert brute force and threats to achieve their goals.Therefore, despite his willingness and desire to help bring peace to this part of the world, where two so-called Christian nations are killing each other, a role for Leo and his papal diplomats is nearly impossible. It will be interesting to see how he navigates what appears to be a trap being laid for him by outside forces, including those in the United States, Russia, and even Italy.What's in a name?When Habemus Papam was announced on May 8 from the balcony overlooking St. Peter's Square, there was, for a brief moment, a fleeting hope that the new pope would keep his baptismal name rather than change it, as nearly all the popes have done in the past 1500 years.Papa Roberto, or Papa Roberto Francesco, would have eloquently and boldly underlined the fact that baptism is the prime sacrament, as the late Pope Francis stressed so many times.For the first five or six centuries, the various Bishops of Rome typically retained their baptismal names. Returning to this more ancient (i.e., traditional) practice could further help de-mythologize the hyper-papalism that has developed over the centuries, not without adverse consequences for reestablishing the original unity of the one Church of Jesus Christ.Another disturbing image from these early days that comes to mind is the continuation of the upside-down order in how the pope's ministry is officially (i.e. liturgically) inaugurated. Again, the issue is the perpetuation of a type of hyper-papalism.The centuries-old and current practice is that the Bishop of Rome is first installed (though until 1965 he was enthroned) at Saint Peter's Basilica (or Square) in the Vatican. He does not take possession of his actual cathedral, commonly called St. John Lateran, until a week later (on May 25).The ecclesiology is mistaken. The pope, whose first and most important title, the one from which all others derive, is Bishop of Rome. It is a common misconception among many people, including many diehard Catholics, that his cathedral is Saint Peter's Basilica. It is not! It's the church located at the Lateran on the other side of the Eternal City. Its formal name is the Cathedral Basilica of the Most Holy Savior and Saints John the Evangelist and John the Baptist.

It was disappointing that, during his own pontificate, Francis rarely visited here. His decision to be buried in the Basilica of Santa Maria Maggiore, just a few blocks away, was both valid and commendable.

However, it is the "Lateran Basilica," the Bishop of Rome's original and ancient cathedral, that is considered the "mother and head of all the churches in the world." The last pope entombed here, of course, was the current pope's namesake, Pope Leo XIII. Hopefully, we will see Leo XIV during his own pontificate use this important church in the Christian world more effectively.In any case, the ministry of the new pope promises to be extremely consequential in these difficult times, even if the secular media is likely to lose interest in much of the quiet and good work Leo is likely to accomplish during his time as Bishop of Rome and Chief Pastor of the Universal Church.A time for some deep soul-searchingOne final thought: the rancor and divisions within the post-Vatican II Church, which were stoked most recently by Benedict XVI's noble but misguided attempt to accommodate and reconcile the small minority of disgruntled traditionalist Catholics with the vast majority of the Church, have caused untold harm.These disruptive anti-Vatican II forces became, thanks to Benedict's pastoral solicitude, the tail wagging the dog. They used the Church's liturgy as a battleground to counter doctrinal developments and ecclesial reforms stemming from the Second Vatican Council.The pro-conciliar liturgical forces have, at times, been just as intransigent. This is especially true in the English- and French-speaking regions of the Church. As the future of the world and global peace hang in the balance, this inner-Church fighting must come to an end.Catholics, and indeed Christians as a whole, do not have the luxury to squabble over internal matters.

That being said, the Catholic bishops of the United States, of which Pope Leo has little or nothing in common, have a grave responsibility in this regard. The US hierarchs, who elected the Archbishop of the Military as their national conference president, must do some deep soul-searching.

Namely, they must try to regain that soul which they corporately sold through their cowardly silence during the past presidential campaign, which saw a majority of churchgoing Catholics cast their ballots for Donald Trump and JD Vance.It is still not too late to speak up, especially in defense of the new pope. God and history will be their judge.