Albert Mohler (0:00)

Foreign It's Friday, May 9, 2025. I'm Albert Mohler, and this is the Briefing, a daily analysis of news and events from a Christian worldview. Well, yesterday in St. Peter's Square, the smoke turned from black to white, indicating that the cardinal electors inside the Sistine Chapel had elected the new Pope of the Roman Catholic Church. The the new pope took as his name Pope Leo xiv. His given name was Robert Francis Prevost, and He was born September 14, 1955, in Chicago, Illinois. That turns out to be a very big story indeed. The headline almost instantly telegraphed across the world is that, number one, the Catholic Church had a new Pope, and number two, the new Pope is an American, the first American pope. Something like that would have seemed almost inconceivable just a matter of a few years ago. We'll talk even later about why it is at least likely, at least in part, that you had an American chosen as the new pope. But the fact is that the big question on the part of just about every observer of the Vatican is what does this mean in terms of direction? What does this mean in terms of the trajectory, not only of the papacy, but thus of the Roman Catholic Church? In order to understand this, let's just remind ourselves of where the Roman Catholic Church stood before the election of Pope Leo XIV yesterday. It was a church that had had, over the course of the last several decades, three popes. First of all, a succession of two rather conservative popes, John Paul II and then Benedict XVI. And then in 2013, Pope Francis was elected. And Pope Francis was a decided turn from the direction of Popes John Paul II and Benedict xvi. John Paul II was a major figure. The first Polish pope. He was a major figure who was very influential on the world stage. He contended for the objectivity of truth. And in terms of his worldview, which was largely based in a Catholic philosophy, he offered a rather formidable defense of Catholic doctrine, but also a formidable defense of many of the pillars of Western civilization. And he was of course, also a champion of liberty over against communism. That was deeply rooted in his experience of Soviet domination of his native population. And so as you look at the period in the 1980s, it was very clear that you had President Ronald Reagan in the United States, British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, and then figures such as Pope John Paul II dominating the scene and largely helping to define the terms that led to the end of the Soviet Union. But after the death of John Paul II came Pope Benedict xvi, formerly Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, a German. He was known for theological Precision. He was a theological conservative, a traditionalist within the Roman Catholic Church. Some of the more liberal tendencies that were set loose in what became known during the 1960s as the Second Vatican Council. Well, Ratzinger, as cardinal, sought to oppose when he was in charge of the Office of the Church, formerly known as the Inquisition, and he served in that role during the time of John Paul ii. At that time, it was recast as the Sacred Congregation for the Defense of of the Faith. And then you had Ratzinger become Pope Benedict xvi. And even though his pontificate was not long, it was a continuation, and it was even an increase in the theological content of the influence of the papacy and in a conservative direction, especially within the Roman Catholic Church. When it came to the German tradition that was represented by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, who became Pope Benedict xvi, it was German theological precision. And it was in large part a confrontation with the liberal tendencies, sometimes known as Modernism, within the Roman Catholic Church, and in particular, against what he saw was an insidious assault upon truth itself. And then, in a development that seemed to surprise just about everyone, Pope Benedict XVI did what was seemingly unthinkable, at least it had been for centuries. He retired, and thus, for a situation, he had two popes. You had Benedict XVI still living, though retired. And then you had the election in 2013 of Pope Francis, an Argentinian pope. Pope Francis was also the first Jesuit pope. And thus there was a very strong tradition of more liberal social action and social justice that became infused in the pontificate of Pope Francis. He was seen as moving in a more liberal direction, though rather tepidly and awkwardly. And so you had statements such as we discussed before, when, with reference, in the very first year of his papacy, in reference to homosexuality, the pope famously asked, who am I to judge? And of course, the obvious answer is, you're the pope. And so, for the most part, since 2013, the Roman Catholic Church has been moving to the left under his pontificate. But it wasn't clear whether or not, or at least it wasn't clear how fast possibly his liberal reforms were, would be translated into official church doctrine. And when his health was failing over the course of the last several years, the thoughts of many Catholics on both sides, on the liberal side and on the conservative side, really shifted to who will be his successor. And that question was answered yesterday. Pope Leo xiv, formerly known as Cardinal Robert Francis Prevost. So people are speaking of him, of course, as an American pope, and he is, although the situation's a little more complicated than that. He was born, as I said, in Chicago, Illinois. He went to a local high school there. He was an altar boy at St. Mary of the Assumption Roman Catholic Church, and that's on the far south side of Chicago. He attended an Augustinian high school, the St. Augustine Seminary High school. He graduated from high school in 1973, and he then went on to Villanova University, from which he graduated with a degree in Mathematics in 1977. He then joined the Augustinian Order and became a priest of the Order of St. Augustine. And that's really interesting because just a little footnote here, The Order of St. Augustine goes all the way back to 1244 and the foundation of a group of friars. They're more commonly referred to as monks. That's not exactly the same thing, but close. In fact, so close that some of the people inside the order will use either word. But it was established in the 13th century, in 1244, and just as a little Reformation footnote, Martin Luther became a friar of the Order of the Hermits of St. Augustine. And it's related to the very same order. The basis of the Order of St. Augustine in the Roman Catholic Church is the Rule of St. Augustine himself. And of course, that goes all the way back to the fifth century. And so in this case, Augustinian doesn't just mean some kind of loose connection. It means that at least in theory, they are basing the order upon The Rule of St. Augustine, very old in the Church. The young Robert Francis Prevost was ordained as a priest in the Augustinian Order. He was ordained by the order's head Archbishop Jean Je Dot, and that took place in 1982. He at that point went on and he gained other degrees, including a Master of Divinity degree from the Catholic Theological Union in Chicago. After that, he earned a Licentiate of Canon Law and later a Doctor of Canon Law degree from the Pontifical College of St. Thomas Aquinas in Rome. Those are major intellectual theological credentials for someone to rise in influence in the Roman Catholic Church. At this point, the young Augustinian priest goes to Peru. He served in various responsibilities there, sometimes as an administrator. He also headed the Augustinian Seminary there in Peru, and he taught Canon law. And then he becomes the head of the Augustinian Province of Chicago, and he returns to the U.S. that would be March 8th of 1999. And then the big news is that in 2001, he was elected as the Prior General of the Augustinians. So that's the top post in the Augustinian Order. That's a major role he is in that post for six years, and then he is elected to a second six year term. And then at this point, after serving two terms in that role, he goes back to Peru. And it's very interesting that shortly after he returns to Peru, Pope Francis named him as a bishop. In this case, he named him as the Bishop of Chicilayo. He also, by the way, became a citizen of Peru at the time. He has status as a citizen both in the United States and in Peru. All right, then the big story really shifts from from there to Rome. And it is in 2023 that Pope Francis appointed this Augustinian priest and leader the prefect for the dicastery of bishops. And he's also named the archbishop Bishop Emeritus of Ciculayo. And he becomes a part of the Curia, that is the Roman Catholic leadership there in Vatican City. But what's so important about the fact that he was heading the dicastery for bishops is that he had a lead role in the Pope's appointment of bishops all over the world. And so running something like air traffic control for bishops, he had enormous responsibility. And with that came enormous visibility there in the Vatican. And this is where, when you look at the timing of the conclave that was held, it started on Wednesday, and by Thursday, Thursday afternoon, there is a pope that indicates that consensus came very fast. And so the likelihood is that the prominence of the man who would become Pope Leo XIV was established very early on in the process of the conclave. And so history will now record, in accordance with the count of the Roman Catholic Church, that Robert Francis Prevost had become Pope Leo XIV as the 267th Pope of the Roman Catholic Church. He appeared yesterday there on the balcony. He made his first appearance before the people. He made his first statement. And then, of course, rather quickly there will follow his inauguration. And then you will pretty much have this man in full control there of the Vatican in terms of the powers of the papacy. And it's a very interesting process. And of course, as I mentioned, it's filled with pageantry. It's intended to be filled with pageantry. It is intended to indicate temporal glory. It is intended to capture the eye with all the sights of the conclave, with all the cardinals lined up, with the Swiss Guards marching and with all the other visual intensity of a Roman Catholic conclave. And so the news for the Roman Catholic Church is we have a pope. Of course, the big question for a lot of people inside and outside the Roman Catholic Church is what kind of pope is Pope Leo XIV likely to be? And this is where the first thing I need to say is that conservative Catholics in the United States appear to be quite concerned in terms of the historical context. The big question is whether or not the new pope would follow the direction of Pope Francis. Would he be a return to someone more traditional, someone more conservative, like Pope Benedict xvi or like John Paul ii? Would he be something of a middle of the road figure or would he push? Because one of the biggest big things coming from the Catholic left, and specifically the secular left, is basically demanding that the Roman Catholic Church change its doctrines, its official doctrines and teachings on issues theological, of course, but most pointedly when it comes to ethical issues, moral issues, such as homosexual behavior, the entire LGBTQ array. But of course, there are other issues, including the role of women in the church. All of these are a part of the agenda of the secular pressure and the not only from the outside, but also the pressure from liberal theologians, biblical scholars, priests, and others within the Roman Catholic Church. So the Roman Catholic Church is pretty much a picture of the larger society around us in this respect. And that's not accidental. It's pretty much a picture of the world around us, because you have people increasingly on the left moving further left, and you have people on the right opposed to the direction to the left. And so the big question is, what will be the direction of the new pope? Now, if you said there was an American pope, the first thing many Catholics around the world would think is more conservative rather than more liberal. And that's because, especially under the two popes that is John Paul II and Benedict xvi, you had the appointment of a lot of major conservative leaders in the Roman Catholic Church in North America and in particular in the United States. And so the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops has been far more conservative than many of the bishops conferences in other parts of the world. But in this case, you're talking about a man whose main experience pastorally and theologically, has been outside the United States. He's not a part of that conservative power structure within the U.S. roman Catholic Church. And it's not just because of that, but it's also because of the fact that he was so close to Pope Francis. You have many people on the Catholic right who are pretty much concerned that he will move the Church in the same direction as the late Pope Francis. But the big question is going to be what he does effectively with official Catholic teaching and doctrine on key issues that in one sense, Pope Francis raised but didn't conclusively answer. In order to get an understanding of this. It's hard for Protestant evangelicals. We have to think about the papacy for just a few moments because it is hard for most evangelicals to imagine an office, a role, one person who is given, and this is, according to official Roman Catholic doctrine, full supreme and universal power over the whole church. So it's hard to imagine anyone holding a singular person holding an office that includes full, supreme and universal power over the whole church. And by that you would think meant the Roman Catholic Church. And that is the first reference of that text. But of course, Roman Catholic doctrine would say that that should be extended to the entire Christian Church. All this goes back to the claim of the Roman Catholic Church that the Pope is the successor to Peter and that Peter holds the keys. And of course, that goes Back to Matthew 16, 17, 19. And of course, the big interpretive issue there is whether what Jesus is saying is upon Peter's consciousness, confession of the faith, Peter's confession of the truth. Upon that truth, Christ will build his church, or whether his church is established upon Peter. That's not a small distinction. And of course, this isn't the time to take this exhaustively, but the Protestant response to the Catholic claim about the papacy in Matthew 16 is that it's implausible that Jesus built his church upon Peter when, just a matter of a few verses later, it is Jesus who is severely rebuking Peter, who for getting the gospel wrong. But I think we just have to understand that when you look at all the pageantry, you look at the Conclave, you look at all the glory, you look at all the intense interest in the papacy, it is because of the role of the Pope holding full, supreme and universal power over the whole Church when it comes to papal supremacy. This was something that did develop in the Church. Now, of course, the Roman Catholic Church claims an unbroken succession of popes going all the way back to Peter himself. I'll just say we do not accept that history. But evangelicals would note that the Bishop of Rome did emerge in the early centuries of the Christian Church. And over a period of time, in a relatively brief amount of time, which is largely explainable by Rome itself as a city and as the central city of the Roman Empire, the Bishop of Rome took on an extraordinary responsibility. But fast forward through the medieval period, where you also had aggrandizements of the papacy go to the year 1870. So that's at the. In the last part of the 19th century. And the First Vatican Council was held then. And out of the First Vatican Council came a doctrine of papal supremacy, which is. Well, it's Even beyond what was held in the medieval period. Out of the First Vatican Council, it was declared that the Pope is the supreme judge of the faithful. It was also declared at the first Vatican Council that no one in the Roman Catholic Church can reopen the judgment of the Pope. That's an amazing thing. Once the Pope has offered an authoritative judgment, the question cannot be reopened because there is no power greater. Of course, then you also had the declaration of papal infallibility and other things that developed in basically the same period of the church. And then you fast forward to Vatican II, and that was what took place in the 1960s. And at Vatican II, nothing was taken away from the papacy. Nothing at all. All the declarations about the power of the papacy that had come through different developments, and that included the First Vatican Council in the 1870s. You come to the 1960s, and at Vatican II, the one shift was towards the establishment of the power of bishops and a synodical process, which meant synods of bishops acting together, but they still largely advised the Pope. And so this was a power that was represented in this new synodical process. But the fact is that the Pope is still the Pope. And that was pretty much on full display yesterday. But it's also key for us to understand that if you ask the simple question, is the new Pope likely to move in a more conservative or a more liberal direction? I think the consensus among Catholics is the likelihood is that this Pope will move in a more liberal direction. Will he do so rapidly and recklessly? In the view of many, no. The idea here is that he is going to be able to make more effective, long lasting change in a more liberal direction, but in a measured way that fits his temperament and his personality and likely also his administration. In terms of previous roles in, in the Vatican and in the Augustinian order. Now in the Roman Catholic Church, there are ways of sending signals that, frankly, evangelical Protestants don't have. And one of the signals was sent when the new Pope appeared on the balcony. And one of the questions is, what is he wearing? And I noticed this right off. He was wearing more traditional papal garments that implied a more traditional understanding of the office than Pope Francis, his predecessor, had worn. Pope Francis was trying to communicate what he called at least a more humble understanding of the papacy in terms even of the garments he wore. Pope Leo XIV appeared on the balcony pretty much in full papal glory. And that means Technicolor. So a lot of the conservative Catholics I know are saying, here's what this is basically probably going to look like. It probably looks like a More measured, consistent, progressive move in a more liberal direction, but one that is likely to come with more lasting consequence, and one that is likely to come while surrounded by many signs of traditional papal power. But then evangelicals, looking at all this, we ask some basic questions, such as, what does this mean to us? The first thing we need to say is that it means something to us just based upon the role of the Pope in the world, the role and influence of the Roman Catholic Church in the world. It is a part of the world process that ought to have our attention. And one of the issues that ought to be in our minds is that many, many people around the world associate the Pope of Rome, the head of the Roman Catholic Church, as the most influential figure in Christianity. Those folks are not operating with the theological discernment. They're not operating in the theological categories that evangelicals are thinking in. And so, just in view of so many in the world, and that includes many of the powerful in the world and many in such institutions as the media around the world, they think of the Pope as speaking for Christianity. And, you know, frankly, evangelicals understood that. When Pope John Paul II spoke, for instance, in defense of the life of the unborn, that was an assist to the pro life movement in the United States and around the world. When Pope Benedict XVI spoke about the Roman Catholic Church defending traditional Christian understandings of human sexuality and gender, that was an assist in the larger culture. And one way to consider the importance of this is just to imagine what happens when that switch is flipped, and instead you have the massive influence of the Roman Catholic Church and the massive influence, personally of the Pope, not in defense of the unborn and, say, fighting the fight for the unborn. It's unlikely, by the way, the Vatican's going to change that policy, but it is likely to change the way the Vatican engages even that kind of issue. And when it comes to the LGBTQ issues, the big question is not so much what direction will this Pope take, but how quickly will he move in a more progressive direction. That appears to be what most conservative Roman Catholics think. But again, we're talking about what this means for evangelicals. And the first thing we need to say is that it doesn't mean anything properly to evangelicals. It doesn't have anything to do with defining evangelical Christianity. It doesn't change a thing about our understanding of the Gospel. It doesn't change a bit of the distance doctrinally between the Roman Catholic Church and Protestant churches and what we understand to be the key issues that were at stake in the 16th century and the Reformation, which continue to be key issues now. So the most important thing for Protestant evangelical Christians do understand is that the Pope is a large part of what most people around the world think is institutional Christianity. And of course, it is the entire purpose of the Roman Catholic Church and the papacy to continue to accentuate that assumption. And, of course, this is where evangelicals, on the other side, we don't have a pope, we don't have a papacy, we don't have a Vatican. And we don't have them for biblical reasons, we don't have them for theological reasons. And it's because behind the papacy itself is what the Reformers clearly identified as the errors of the Roman Catholic Church when it comes to the entire sacramental system, in particular the sacrament of penance and the power invested in priests as mediatorial figures, even with the ability to forgive sin. And, of course, the role of popes in such things as allowing the sale of indulgences, given also the doctrine of purgatory, with the indication that it is within the power of the Pope or the agents of the Pope, by the direction of the Pope, even to be able to render decisions that will have eternal consequences. And the other thing to keep in mind here is that the Roman Catholic Church understands there to be a confluence of authorities upon which it makes its declarations and the unfolding progress of doctrine. And that means that the Roman Catholic Church claims in its magisterium to have the stewardship for the development of doctrine that is directly antithetical to what Protestant evangelicals understand. And furthermore, the confluence of these authorities means that, yes, the Roman Catholic Church will accept the authority of Scripture, but it accepts the authority of Scripture alongside other authorities, most importantly the tradition of the Church and the Church's own authority through the magisterium. And furthermore, it accepts biblical authority insofar as the Bible is interpreted by the official magisterial authority of the Roman Catholic Church. And this means that evangelical Christians are not tempted by the idea of having a Pope, because that is a part of a complex of a theological system. That is exactly what the Reformers rebelled against in seeking to reform the church in the 16th century. And even though someone like Martin Luther didn't begin by calling for an end to the papacy, by the end of his life, that's exactly what he was calling for. But again, it is not just the papacy. You can't isolate the papacy from the larger system of the Roman Catholic Church and the larger systematic expression of Roman Catholic doctrine. And so the bottom line in all of this beyond the obvious issues of the Reformation and beyond is that we're talking about this today because the entire world is talking about it. We're talking about this today because the big issues, say the liberal or conservative direction in terms of doctrine and morality, that not a challenge that is unique to the Roman Catholic Church. It is a challenge to every single body dealing with such biblical authority and such issues as the LGBTQ array. And so, in that sense, what is happening in the Roman Catholic Church is of interest to evangelical Christians. And then you also have to understand that in the context of the struggle on so many of the most important issues of the day, and that means, of course, the controversial issues like abortion and again, the LGBTQ revolution, the entire sexual revolution, the integrity of marriage, all of these things. Insofar as we are in a great battle over these questions, it has mattered a great deal, especially here in the United States, that conservative Roman Catholics have stood alongside conservative evangelicals in terms of a common front on so many of these issues. And thus, when conservative or traditionalist Roman Catholics, who are our friends, they indicate that they're very concerned about this new pope, the fact is that even those of us outside the Roman Catholic Church understand there may be good reasons for such concern. One last thing. There is so much at stake here, and one thing to note is that this will be an unfolding story. And the way this generally works is that there's an initial announcement, and all of the press, I don't know if you just noticed this, all of the press then goes fawning over this new Pope, indicating that this is a person who's going to bring unity and all these things, and they'll talk about what a high spiritual moment it was. It's interesting to hear all these secular news media folk talking about issues, spiritual, with absolutely no knowledge whatsoever, and frankly, overcome, as it seems, by a certain kind of political correctness and emotionalism at the same time. But the pattern is largely this. Just a few days, and then just a few weeks later, you have people inside the church actually speaking out loud, candidly about what they think in the shift from Pope Francis to Pope Leo xiv. The interesting thing is what will the shift look like when the shift is seen in shifting from who am I to judge? To what will he now judge? Okay, I want to thank you, as always, for listening to the briefing, and many of you listen to thinking in public. And I want to tell you there is a new series. It's a video series, and it's just started. It's called in the Library. And kind of taking you into my library for a conversation. And I brought some others into the first of these conversations, my colleagues Tom Schreiner, Jim Hamilton and Steve Willem. And we're looking at a book recently released that basically claims that the Christian church has misunderstood the gospel, well, basically until now, for about 2,000 years. And it's a book that says that somehow the divide between Catholicism and Protestantism can just be overcome with a new understanding. And so we take that on. And so we ask the question, has the church misunderstood the gospel for 2000 years? Let me just cut to the quick and tell you the answer is no. But I think you'll find the conversation very interesting in the library. To subscribe at YouTube just subscribe. Albertmoeller Official all right. Many more will be coming in the fall. Thanks for listening to the briefing. For more information, go to my website@albertmoeller.com youm can follow me on Twitter or X by going to twitter.com AlbertMohler for information on the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, go to spts.edu. for information on Boyce College, just go to boycecollege.com I'll meet you again on Monday for the briefing.