.jpeg) |
| Trump, the healer (Truth Social) |
As an avowed Never-Trumper, I rarely am surprised by any ignorant thing our president says or does. But even I was taken aback by headlines this week that suggest Trump, his thuggish loyalists, or both had threatened Pope Leo. It's bad enough that Trump took reasonable criticism from Leo about the Iran war and turned it into a rather chippy quarrel, at least from the president's end of things. Any mentally balanced person would have simply let Leo's words go and kept any dispute on low simmer. But Trump, of course, is not mentally balanced, so he had to fire back and turn it into an intercontinental conflagration.
Are the Trumpers so dense that they thought the pope would come out in favor of violence and war? Do they not understand that, as head of the Catholic church, the pope often is seen as "moral leader for the world"? Did they really think such a figure would support an unprovoked attack on Iran, especially its civilian population?
Finally, we have this question: Did the Trump administration actually threaten Pope Leo and perhaps the Catholic Church itself? Let's consider the evidence . . .
First, we have this headline from NPR: "Pope Leo says he does not fear Trump as he pushes back in feud over Iran War. And the story includes this passage:
U.S.-born Pope Leo XIV pushed back Monday on President Trump's broadside against him over the U.S.-Israel war in Iran, telling reporters that the Vatican's appeals for peace and reconciliation are rooted in the Gospel, and that he doesn't fear the Trump administration.
"To put my message on the same plane as what the president has attempted to do here, I think is not understanding what the message of the Gospel is," Leo told The Associated Press aboard the papal plane en route to Algeria. "And I'm sorry to hear that but I will continue on what I believe is the mission of the church in the world today."
History's first U.S.-born pope stressed that he was not making a direct attack against Trump or anyone else with his general appeal for peace and criticisms of the "delusion of omnipotence" that is fueling the Iran war and other conflicts around the world.
In short, a pope's perspective on matters of war and peace is very different from that of a president. Do Trump and his associates not grasp that? Here is more from the NPR story:
"I will not enter into debate. The things that I say are certainly not meant as attacks on anyone. The message of the Gospel is very clear: 'Blessed are the peacemakers,'" Leo said.
"I will not shy away from announcing the message of the Gospel and inviting all people to look for ways of building bridges of peace and reconciliation, and looking for ways to avoid war any time that's possible."
Speaking to other reporters, he added: "I'm not afraid of the Trump administration or of speaking out loudly about the message of the Gospel, which is what the Church works for.''
At the risk of coming across as a "Pope whisperer," here are the main points I think Leo was trying to make:
(1) He does not seek to attack or debate anyone, but . . .
(2) He will not let Trump intimidate him into staying silent on matters of war and peace, and . . .
(3) He does not think Trump made any serious attempt to avoid war, and that has led to suffering around the globe -- and that suffering probably will continue to grow.
What about other takes on our question "Did the Trump administration actually threaten Pope Leo and perhaps the Catholic Church itself"? Thom Hartmann, one of the leading progressive voices in the U.S., provides background at Raw America that strongly suggests the answer is yes. In fact, Hartmann's headline on the matter is not subtle: "Trump Attacked the Pope -- the Pope Hit Back." Hartmann writes:
This story is almost too extraordinary to believe, but it is documented and it matters. (I will highlight some of the most extraordinary passages.) After Pope Leo XIV delivered his State of the World address in January — arguing that diplomacy was being replaced by force and that “a zeal for war is spreading” — Undersecretary of Defense Elbridge Colby summoned Cardinal Christophe Pierre, the Vatican’s U.S. representative, to a closed-door meeting at the Pentagon. What was said inside that room has no precedent in American history.
Sources familiar with the meeting say Colby told the cardinal directly: “The United States has the military power to do whatever it wants in the world. The Catholic Church had better take its side.” A U.S. official present then invoked the Avignon papacy — the 14th-century episode in which the French monarchy forced the Catholic Church into submission, ordered an assault on Pope Boniface VIII, and relocated the papacy from Rome to southern France. Many inside the Vatican interpreted that historical reference as a direct threat to use military force against the Holy See. There are no public records of any previous meeting between American officials and Vatican representatives at the Pentagon, let alone one in which the United States suggested it could force the Bishop of Rome into captivity.
Every American president since Eisenhower has understood that the moral authority of religious institutions, however imperfect, is one of the few forces in the world that can check the impulse toward endless war. What this administration did in that room wasn’t just a diplomatic blunder. It was a declaration that it recognizes no authority above its own, not law, not history, and not conscience.
The consequences were immediate. Pope Leo canceled his planned visit to the United States. And on July 4th — America’s 250th birthday — rather than celebrating with the administration that threatened him, he will visit Lampedusa, the tiny Mediterranean island where North African migrants wash ashore by the thousands. He did not choose that date by accident. The White House dismissed the entire account as “highly exaggerated and distorted,” insisting the meeting was “respectful and reasonable.” You can draw your own conclusions.
In an update, Hartmann provides more alarming details, focusing on a Truth Social post that launched Trump's assault on a religious institution:
In a 334-word broadside, Trump branded Pope Leo XIV — the first American-born pope in history — as “WEAK on Crime, and terrible for Foreign Policy,” accused him without any basis of supporting Iranian nuclear weapons, and claimed credit for Leo’s election to the papacy, writing that if he wasn’t in the White House, Leo wouldn’t be in the Vatican.
Trump then said he preferred the pope’s older brother, a self-described MAGA supporter from Florida: “I like his brother Louis much better than I like him, because Louis is all MAGA.” Leo did not take the bait quietly. Aboard the papal flight to Algiers at the start of an 11-day trip to Africa, the pope told reporters plainly: “I have no fear of the Trump administration, or speaking out loudly of the message of the Gospel, which is what I believe I am here to do.” Asked about Truth Social specifically, Leo offered a pointed aside about the name of the platform itself: “It’s ironic — the name of the site itself. Say no more.”
I do believe Leo just took a dig at Trump and his massive ego. Long live the Pope:
The pontiff vowed to continue speaking out against the war. “Too many people are suffering in the world today,” he said. “Too many innocent people are being killed. And I think someone has to stand up and say there’s a better way.”
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops pushed back on Trump directly. Archbishop Paul Coakley said he was “disheartened” by the president’s words, and reminded the country that Leo is “not his rival” and “not a politician” but “the Vicar of Christ.”
With U.S. Catholic bishops involved, that takes the sparring to a whole new level, on Trump's home turf. And polling suggests Trump made a tactical error by needlessly confronting the Pope, Hartmann writes:
When a sitting American president attacks the leader of the world’s largest Christian denomination for opposing a war, and the bishops push back publicly, we’re not watching a political spat. We’re watching the moral authority of a faith tradition refuse to be conscripted into justifying bloodshed, and that’s a line that matters, whatever your own beliefs happen to be.
The polling on this fight is brutal for Trump. A March NBC survey found 42 percent of Americans view Leo favorably and just 8 percent unfavorably. Trump’s numbers: 41 percent favorable, 53 percent unfavorable.
The Trump vs. Leo dustup included an element that seemed to put a spotlight on Trump's all-encompassing narcissism. It was another case of Trump being unable to leave matters alone. Hartmann writes:
Less than an hour after attacking the pope, Trump posted an AI-generated image of himself depicted as Jesus Christ, healing a man in a hospital bed while surrounded by American flags, bald eagles, and monuments.
The backlash from within his own movement was immediate and sharp.
Former Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene called it “more than blasphemy” and said it carried “an Antichrist spirit.” MAGA podcaster Michael Knowles told his 1.4 million followers the president should “delete the picture, no matter the intent.” Daily Wire culture reporter Megan Basham called it “OUTRAGEOUS blasphemy” and demanded he take it down and “ask for forgiveness from the American people and then from God.” Far-right influencer Milo Yiannopoulos blamed a White House faith adviser for the president’s behavior and wrote, simply, “Pray for his soul. Pray for us all.”
The image went up on Orthodox Easter Sunday.
The use of messianic imagery to sanctify political power isn’t new, every authoritarian movement of the 20th century eventually wrapped itself in God and flag. It’s how leaders signal to their followers that their authority isn’t just political, it’s divine. When even the MAGA faithful are saying “this has gone too far,” that tells you something important about where this is headed.
No comments:
Post a Comment