What papal name will the new Pope choose?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

He would be Lando II, of course.

[Lincoln Republican]

I like the name Benjamin.

Pope Benjamin I.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Pope Ron Paul I. I would like to see a Pope Emanuel, though that might be considered sacrilegious.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I would like to see a Pope Emanuel, though that might be considered sacrilegious.

I think it would, and for that matter Peter II probably would too.

[Maxwell]

Pope Zosimus II

[Middle-aged Europe]

Shaddam IV

[politicallefty]

He would be Lando II, of course.

I like that one. I'd prefer a more obscure name in terms of modern convention, such as Urban IX or Celestine VI (or perhaps one of the many much older names only used once). Hilarius II would be amusing. On the other hand, I'd almost guarantee there will never be a Sixtus VI. Overall, I'd like to see the next pope use a name that hasn't been used in many years. I hope he'll stay away from the more recent names.

On a related, can anyone tell me where the name Urban actually came from in terms of a name?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

He would be Lando II, of course.

I like that one. I'd prefer a more obscure name in terms of modern convention, such as Urban IX or Celestine VI (or perhaps one of the many much older names only used once). Hilarius II would be amusing. On the other hand, I'd almost guarantee there will never be a Sixtus VI. Overall, I'd like to see the next pope use a name that hasn't been used in many years. I hope he'll stay away from the more recent names.

On a related, can anyone tell me where the name Urban actually came from in terms of a name?

It wasn't until around the tenth century that popes began taking regnal names that weren't their birth names.  Pope Saint Urban I was Pope from 14 October 222 to 23 May 230 and is the earliest pope for which we have the exact days of their reign. Urban means exact what you'd think, "of the city" and you'd have to ask his parents why they named him that.  All of the later Urbans beginning with Urban II in 1088 took the name at least in part to honor the third century Saint Urban.

[DemPGH]

I think it's time for Clement. Clement XV, I believe. "Mild / merciful" in Latin, I think.

Incidentally, two questions: 1) does anyone know if the name a pope chooses has a broad or overall theme attached to its history? At this point probably not but maybe once upon a time, although I don't know, and 2) is there a reasoning process behind a pope choosing a name, or is it just personal? It probably depends upon a lot of factors, but I was wondering if there is any rule of thumb here.

[Joe Biden 2020]

I like the names "Cornelius" (Acts 10) or "Barnabas" (Paul's traveling companion).

What is the possibility of Benedict XVII?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Incidentally, two questions: 1) does anyone know if the name a pope chooses has a broad or overall theme attached to its history? At this point probably not but maybe once upon a time, although I don't know, and 2) is there a reasoning process behind a pope choosing a name, or is it just personal? It probably depends upon a lot of factors, but I was wondering if there is any rule of thumb here.

I can't really answer the first question but the second depends upon the Pope. Benedict XVI was trying to evoke both Benedict XV, a somewhat withdrawn and highly intellectual pontiff--whose reign lasted eight years, incidentally, during and immediately after the first World War--and the original St Benedict of Nursia, the sixth-century founder of Catholic monasticism. Here's the Pope's own explanation:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

John XXIII had considerably more personal reasons (and I'm given to understand this quote is rather famous):

You must be logged in to read this quote.

A website called papalartifacts.com says that Paul VI's name was 'an indication of his intention to spread the Gospel'. John Paul I took his name specifically in honor of his predecessors John XXIII, who had made him a bishop, and Paul VI, who had made him a cardinal. John Paul II took it partially because of the feeling that John Paul I's pontificate was rendered incomplete by his having died a month into it (although the John Pauls were actually very different men and theologians).

Pius XII's life and thought were strongly influenced by his predecessor Pius XI, and Pius XI's by his predecessor's predecessor St Pius X. St Pius X chose his name in solidarity with the terrible, horrible, no-good, very bad lives of Pius VI (imprisoned by Napoleon), Pius VII (also imprisoned by Napoleon, then exiled), Pius VIII (had terrible health, was a puppet to one Giuseppe Cardinal Albani, and may or may not have been poisoned), and Pius IX (confined to the Vatican during the Unification of Italy). So most of the modern Piuses (Pii?) seem to have had some sort of affinity for their most recent predecessor of that name. They also appear to tend to be particularly devoted to Mary. The pope between St Pius X and Pius XI was Benedict XV, who had been the archbishop of the same see, Bologna, as Benedict XIV.

So, of the five most recent popes, Paul VI and Benedict XVI had theological and historical reasons, and John XXIII, John Paul I, and John Paul II had, to varying degrees, personal reasons.

*this is now considered incorrect, and the current list of Popes lacks a John XVI or a John XX. There was also no legit Benedict X.

[Nhoj]

I Take it popes no longer refer to themselves in the dual person thing?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I Take it popes no longer refer to themselves in the dual person thing?

Paul VI ceased usage of the royal 'we', yes.

[JQ]

Lando II, or Billy Dee I.

[politicallefty]

Incidentally, two questions: 1) does anyone know if the name a pope chooses has a broad or overall theme attached to its history? At this point probably not but maybe once upon a time, although I don't know, and 2) is there a reasoning process behind a pope choosing a name, or is it just personal? It probably depends upon a lot of factors, but I was wondering if there is any rule of thumb here.

I can't really answer the first question but the second depends upon the Pope. Benedict XVI was trying to evoke both Benedict XV, a somewhat withdrawn and highly intellectual pontiff--whose reign lasted eight years, incidentally, during and immediately after the first World War--and the original St Benedict of Nursia, the sixth-century founder of Catholic monasticism. Here's the Pope's own explanation:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

John XXIII had considerably more personal reasons (and I'm given to understand this quote is rather famous):

You must be logged in to read this quote.

A website called papalartifacts.com says that Paul VI's name was 'an indication of his intention to spread the Gospel'. John Paul I took his name specifically in honor of his predecessors John XXIII, who had made him a bishop, and Paul VI, who had made him a cardinal. John Paul II took it partially because of the feeling that John Paul I's pontificate was rendered incomplete by his having died a month into it (although the John Pauls were actually very different men and theologians).

Pius XII's life and thought were strongly influenced by his predecessor Pius XI, and Pius XI's by his predecessor's predecessor St Pius X. St Pius X chose his name in solidarity with the terrible, horrible, no-good, very bad lives of Pius VI (imprisoned by Napoleon), Pius VII (also imprisoned by Napoleon, then exiled), Pius VIII (had terrible health, was a puppet to one Giuseppe Cardinal Albani, and may or may not have been poisoned), and Pius IX (confined to the Vatican during the Unification of Italy). So most of the modern Piuses (Pii?) seem to have had some sort of affinity for their most recent predecessor of that name. They also appear to tend to be particularly devoted to Mary. The pope between St Pius X and Pius XI was Benedict XV, who had been the archbishop of the same see, Bologna, as Benedict XIV.

So, of the five most recent popes, Paul VI and Benedict XVI had theological and historical reasons, and John XXIII, John Paul I, and John Paul II had, to varying degrees, personal reasons.

*this is now considered incorrect, and the current list of Popes lacks a John XVI or a John XX. There was also no legit Benedict X.

Based on what you know, what do you think some of the most likely candidates will choose for a papal name (such as Turkson or Scola)?

[Insula Dei]

It will likely be John Paul. Not a very daring prediction, but keep in mind that we still have people screaming Sancto Subito whenever John Paul II is mentioned.

Now, I'd be very glad with any pope that would choose John XXIV as papal name, if only because it suggests a laudible appreciation of the great John XXIII.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Alexander IX would be my first pick, although I would be all right with Nicholas VI, Adrian VII, Paul VII, or Gregory XVII.  Of course, none of those will probably be chosen.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Even tho the name has nothing to do with the number, Sixtus VI would be an interesting name.  I don't see Nicholas VI as a possible name at all, and may well never be used. The last Nicholas, Nicholas V issued a pair of bulls, Dun Diversas and Romanus Pontifex that were the first to give papal sanction to the practice of enslaving the infidel. Paul VII is unlikely for the next pope, simply because anyone choosing that name will be raising expectations of being a reformer and the current leadership has no real interest in reform. However, there will someday be a Paul VII, just not this time.

Of the names that have been used more than once, I expect that the next pope will likely choose one of these names: Gregory XVII, Clement XV, Innocent XIV, Leo XIV, Adrian VII, Felix V, or Paschal III.

While I expect few others will bandy the possibility of Paschal III, it should be considered the most likely dark horse name. The conclave will be taking place during the Paschal season and this year marks the 900th anniversary of the Hospitaller Order of Saint John receiving papal recognition and protection under Paschal II.

[Benj]

If we're looking for obscure names, I could see Pontian II, as a reference to Pope Pontian, the first Pope known to have abdicated, and showing an intention to continue Benedict XVI's policy of abdication. At least, that seems like the most likely one-off name to be reused to me.

[DemPGH]

Excellent answer, Nathan - thank you. I think that actually answers the first question as well - the part of your answer regarding Pius, anyway. I do recall in 2005 on the news it being said that a previous pope named Benedict was a source of inspiration and influence on the then-newly selected Ratzinger, so I suspect that there are no real broad themes associated with the names, but perhaps limited themes over relative timespans that wouldn't be at all evident to a non-specialist in papal history. As well, anyone in a position to become pope is probably very aware of his predecessors' legacies, so the choosing of a papal name is likely personal on some level if not many.

Anyway, yeah, Sixtus is an odd name. I thought it meant "the 6th," but it apparently means "polished" while Sextus would mean "the 6th."

Anyway, Sergius V, anybody? Agapetus III? Didn't think so.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I could see a pope who had been involved in healing the breach between the Roman and Greek churches taking the name Constantine II.  I could see a pope elected from outside the conclave taking the name Fabian II. Mark II as well as Matthew I and Luke I are certainly possible for a pope who wished to honor one of other gospel writers than John. Miltiades II is a possible, but not very likely name for an African Pope.  Francis I is also possible. I would be quite surprised if any other name that has been used either once or not at all was chosen, and even these are unlikely.

[Benj]

I could see a pope who had been involved in healing the breach between the Roman and Greek churches taking the name Constantine II.  I could see a pope elected from outside the conclave taking the name Fabian II. Mark II as well as Matthew I and Luke I are certainly possible for a pope who wished to honor one of other gospel writers than John. Miltiades II is a possible, but not very likely name for an African Pope.  Francis I is also possible. I would be quite surprised if any other name that has been used either once or not at all was chosen, and even these are unlikely.

Miltiades II would also be a good name for someone seeking East-West reunification, actually.

In theory, a new name is always possible through combining names in the manner of John Paul. There aren't that many names suitable for combining, though.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Excellent answer, Nathan - thank you. I think that actually answers the first question as well - the part of your answer regarding Pius, anyway. I do recall in 2005 on the news it being said that a previous pope named Benedict was a source of inspiration and influence on the then-newly selected Ratzinger, so I suspect that there are no real broad themes associated with the names, but perhaps limited themes over relative timespans that wouldn't be at all evident to a non-specialist in papal history. As well, anyone in a position to become pope is probably very aware of his predecessors' legacies, so the choosing of a papal name is likely personal on some level if not many.

Yes, I realized that that answered the first question to some extent as I was writing it. Recent Benedicts tend to be intellectuals or Bolognese or both, Pii tend to be associated with some sort of real or perceived political persecution (Pius XI and Pius XII were both involved with Nazi Germany in ways that have been characterized as everything from quietly heroic to unforgivably complicit depending on who you ask, and their reigns also saw anticlerical movements in the Soviet Union and (relatively) briefly Mexico and Spain), and Johns going back centuries and centuries often have or expect short reigns.

In theory, a new name is always possible through combining names in the manner of John Paul. There aren't that many names suitable for combining, though.

I'd been turning over John Pius (or Pius John, which in my opinion sounds better in Italian but worse in English) or John Leo in my head, actually. I doubt there would be much appetite for a John Benedict (or Benedict XVII, for that matter) already.

[Benj]

John Clement could work, too. So could John Alexander, or Pius Alexander (not that Alexander is a particularly likely choice).

[Bacon King]

Pope Sixtus the Sixth would be a hilarious name.