Above all, the result of the papal election, or "conclave," is seen not as a shift toward liberalism or a swing back to conservatism, but as a message of continuity. In his speech from the balcony of St. Peter’s Basilica, the new pope stated that the Catholic Church must “build bridges” and “welcome all people.” This was a clear signal of his intention to carry on the reforms initiated by Pope Francis.
Even before the conclave began, Prevost was considered one of the leading contenders. As Prefect of the Dicastery for Bishops, responsible for the appointment of bishops, he held significant behind-the-scenes influence.
Still, many observers dismissed the possibility of an American pope, believing it unlikely. The long-standing “conventional wisdom” was that choosing someone from a global superpower could cause concern among other regions of the Church.
Having spent most of his clerical career in Peru, Prevost gained support from cardinals in Latin America, a region whose Catholic Church has long emphasized social justice for the poor. His first speech as pope was delivered first in Italian and then in Spanish, but he did not speak in English. The true implications of an American pope remain to be seen (Prevost has also obtained Peruvian citizenship). He is not expected to defer to the leadership of the American Church, which is often more conservative and aligned with the Republican Party.
Prevost has previously criticized U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance’s doctrinal interpretations regarding compassion for others, as well as former President Donald Trump’s immigration policies. In April, he reposted criticism of Trump related to the mistaken deportation of a Maryland man to a prison in El Salvador.
However, despite these political comments, Prevost’s election does not appear to be a deliberate rebuke of Trump, Vance, or the MAGA (“Make America Great Again”) movement.

The conclave began on May 7 and concluded in just two days after four rounds of voting. The 133 cardinals who participated seemed united not around ideological divisions within the Church, but around the desire to promote a message of brotherhood. Every part of the process carried symbolic weight. The new pope’s vestments, more ornate than Francis’s, suggested a partial return to tradition and a renewed focus on ceremony.
As the faithful gathered in St. Peter’s Square waited for his appearance, Prevost entered the “Room of Tears” to pray and change into the papal garments. This room’s name reflects the emotional weight of assuming the responsibility of the papacy.
When the announcement of Prevost’s election was made, an unprecedented moment occurred. “USA, USA!”—the chant of American voices could be heard in the live video feed of the square.
The conclave took place under strict secrecy. In the Sistine Chapel, where it was held, checks were made to ensure no listening devices were present, electronic jamming systems were activated, and cardinals were forbidden from any outside communication.
What happened behind those closed doors may never be fully known. Some cardinals might one day reveal details to Catholic media, but the full extent of political maneuvering is unlikely to come to light. It’s possible that deals were made and certain guarantees offered between rival factions and power brokers.
The deciding factors in papal elections often go beyond ideology. Personality, charisma, geographical background, experience in particular Vatican offices, and even public speaking ability are all taken into consideration. Some prioritize political skill, while others focus on spiritual qualities.
Regardless of Prevost’s past statements or actions, how he will lead as pope remains unknown. At the time of his election, almost no one could have predicted what Pope Francis would become. The true significance of the rise of Leo XIV has yet to be revealed.