The White House can’t stop fighting the sharks.
On Tuesday night, Vice President JD Vance – who converted to Catholicism in 2019 – accused Pope Leo XIV of not understanding the Church’s position on warsaying it was “very important for the pope to be careful when he talks about theological matters.” Later in the evening, President Donald Trump he continued to insult the pope for not supporting his attacks on Iran.
- The White House has continued its feud with Pope Leo XIV into the fourth day.
- It’s not the first time that Trump or Vance have argued with the pope, but does this time feel different?
- For at least three reasons, Leo turns out to be the strongest foil for Trump to fight or bully: He has strong conservative support, he speaks on a divisive issue, and he is better at talking about politics than Francis.
In Leo, however, they have found a tougher opponent than they expected. He held his ground calmly, struck back and some of his insults – called the Trump-owned platform Truth Social “ridiculous” – and, perhaps most importantly, has brought support from Prominent right-leaning Catholics in the United States. The top Republican in the Senate restless voices. Trump, who is quickly used to holding neutral public figures in a more conciliatory position, is not winning this time.
This is not the first time the White House has met the pope. Trump, and sometimes Vancethey were in a long conflict with Pope Francis returning again 2016 Republican presidential primarywhen Francis indirectly suggested that Trump “wasn’t a Christian,” because he focused on “building walls … and not bridges.” In the past, even Trump’s other GOP candidates, including Catholics like then-Sen. Marco Rubiohe supported him.
As a result, Trump may be surprised by how much stronger the opposition is this time around. Even before he doubled down on his earlier attacks on Social Truth and published a controversial (and blasphemous) AI-generated image of him as Jesus Christ, many of his regular allies, including conservative Catholics, were calling him out.
“The remarks made by President Trump on Social Truth about the Pope were inappropriate and disrespectful,” Catholic Bishop Robert Barron, a member of Trump’s Commission on Religious Freedom who is popular with conservative Catholics, said on X – a statement that is indicative of the reaction of right-leaning Catholics.
Why is the current spit so different? Much has to do with Pope Leo, who is starting with a much larger base of support from American Catholics on the right. After years of messing with Francis, Trump and Vance may find they’ve messed with the wrong pope this time.
Traditional and conservative Catholics in the United States trust Leo more than Francis
Since assuming the papacy, Leo has shown himself to be adept at using the spotlight of his office, winning over critics, and building popular appeal to strengthen his hand — all moves Trump could recognize.
Much of the goodwill toward justice toward Leo today has nothing to do with American politics, but with matters of faith: internal Vatican debates about doctrine and the role of the papacy. He has struck a chord with traditionalist and more orthodox Catholics, who were more skeptical of Francis’ approach, and more inclined to take his side as a result.
When Leo was elected pope, American Catholics, who lean more theologically and politically conservative than the rest of the world, weren’t sure what to make of him. He was not one of those called electors, so his election shocked the world.
He was the first pope born in the United States, from Chicago, but like Pope Francis born in Argentina he had spent several decades in Latin America, where the Church had a reputation for another time. challenge capitalism from the left. He came from the Augustinian order, a more hermetic and austere culture, as opposed to the more visible and liberal Jesuit order that taught Francis. Although he was promoted by the “liberal” Francis through the Vatican hierarchy, Leo was very popular with the progressive, conservative and traditional clergy in the Church.
Traditionalist and conservative Catholics were cautiously optimistic, and soon saw signs that Leo was rewarding their faith in him. They welcomed his restoration of the deep, grand, traditional symbols of the papacy, which Francis had neglected. During his first public address, he gave a blessing in Latin – traditionalists strongly opposed the 20th-century Church abandoning the language – and wore the traditional papal garb, including a red mozzetta, or short cape, (as opposed to Francis’ white robes).
These and other symbolic steps were a sign that he is “at least deliberately not following in Francis’s footsteps,” Crisis magazine’s Catholic editor-in-chief, Eric Sammons, said. at that time.
And sure enough, the changes that followed allowed many traditionalists to breathe a sigh of relief. Today, at worst, he was a centrist: traditional in style and conservative in doctrine, even as he continued the Franciscan tradition of Catholic social teaching. He did not immediately enter into social and cultural discussions, instead he prioritized thinking artificial intelligenceeconomic justice, and respect for human rights; he spoke less frequently than Francis, who was known for his off-the-cuff words; and he did not oppose those followers of the Traditional Latin Mass.
He returned to the papal quarters in the Apostolic Palace, which Francis left during his papacy, and took up old traditions, such as carrying a cross through the Colosseum on Good Friday this year – something Pope John Paul II used to do. Even now, Catholic observers look for signs and symptoms of Leo’s theological and stylistic tendencies: looking to see what he wears, what he carries, and who he promotes.
And perhaps most importantly, he seemed willing to reconcile and reconcile the differences between the promoters of the traditional Latin Mass and the mainstream Catholic tradition of the vernacular that Francis promoted. Today he has gone far to allow discussion of the Latin Mass during the conclaves of the cardinals, opening up the possibility that the previous restrictions could be re-examined, and called for “generous inclusion,” of his followers, although he has reminded traditionalists not to allow their support for the Latin Mass to be a political body.
A common argument for Francis in America was that he received praise from secular liberals, but not new converts to protest. decrease in church attendance in the United States. Today he benefits from a different trend: The American Church, in particular, is seeing a cultural revival: young Catholics to fill seats in large city parishes and post their experiences online. Catholicism, and its cultural beauty, is fashionable again. Converts and baptisms are rise againalbeit slowly. Religious leaders and Catholics speak more. And Leo is part of that animation.
The Iran war has really divided conservative Catholics in the United States
It’s not just Leo’s base of support that’s fueling his argument with Trump; it is also an issue at its center: the war in Iran, and the increased use of military force more broadly.
Republicans and Democrats have tended to ignore or explain certain conflicts with the Church as neutral – immigration for Republicans, abortion for the Democrats. President Joe Biden was denied fellowship at a South Carolina church about his support for abortion rights, which coincided with a long-running debate about how to punish pro-choice Catholic politicians.
But Leo is talking about the issue that is really dividing conservative Catholics: the joint US-Israeli war in Iran. The polls show unacceptability and Catholics over Trump’s handling of the war, and the fact that the war is happening – both leave a double-digit margin of Catholic voters gave Trump a victory in 2024, according to opinion polls.
These divisions it is not only theological; they also enter into cultural and political divisions within the party. But Vance’s reservations about the war and resignation of Joe Kentformer director of the National Counterterrorism Center and a conservative Catholic, suggests these tensions exist even within Trump’s own White House.
Francis appeared aggressive in his battle with Trump
As mentioned above, popes often take principled positions on issues that are divisive in American politics. But they usually try to avoid getting caught up in conflicts with politicians and keep their criticisms more general.
As a result, when Francis took on Trump, it was seen by many as a violation of what professor of religion Stephen Prothero called “.the unspoken gentleman’s agreement in American politics” that Catholic priests are avoiding domestic campaign issues.
If you need a refresher, in 2016, Francis took time out while wrapping up an apostolic visit to Mexico to comment on the news of the day. This was peak of Trump’s anti-immigrant, anti-nationalist, “wall-building” campaign for the Republican nomination — and just days before South Carolina’s primary or make-or-break election. – and Francis injected himself to the middle of it.
Although he did not use Trump’s name, he responded to a question about the candidate by saying that “a person who only thinks about building walls, wherever he is, and not building bridges, is not a Christian.” The comment was seen as a direct attack on the candidate.
Leo has appeared to be more moderate and moderate in his positions, thus giving him more influence when he chooses to speak.
Francis came from Argentina, where the Church played a major role in expressing opinions on politics, and perhaps he did not realize how he was going. He had a knack for preoccupation, which sometimes made him think about issues at the wrong time. And maybe he wasn’t right to do politics at a time when it was clear: In dedicating a border wall instead of Trump. uniquely takes moral issueshe mentioned the rank is widely supported somehow with Republican politicians and even some Democrats.
Regardless of its intent, it sparked a wave of criticism from Republican Catholics: Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio supported Trump against the pope: “We have to have a strategy to protect our border … that’s not unchristian,” Bush. he saidwhile Rubio he made a case that independent countries have “the right to control who enters, when they enter and how they enter,” just like Vatican City.
And of course, Trump responded, accusing Francis of being a “puppet” of Mexico and warning that the Vatican will be “attacked by ISIS” if he is not elected president. And thus establishing a relationship of tension and friction between the pope and Trump.
On the contrary, while Leo has confirmed that he is ready to respond to Trump, the “feud” this time only started when Trump launched a personal attack against him on Social Truth.
In Francis’s case, it also didn’t help that he had already gained credibility by 2016 with his forays into politically charged topics, which made them less inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt. His frequent focus on the poor, on immigrants, the persecuted, and more progressive or less radical takes on controversial issues such as homosexuality, climate change, abortion, and capitalism, all opened him up to attack and dismissal from politically radical Catholics.
Taken together, you can see two very different popes: Francis was a follower, but a controversial leader who seemed more antagonistic toward politicians and issues that conservative American Catholics cared about. Leo has appeared to be more modest and moderate in his positions, thus giving him more influence when he chooses to speak, which he has chosen to do on an issue where he could actually bring about some change.
Trump paid no political price for his battle with Francis. If that changes with Leo, either for Trump or for his successor, he has chosen a stronger foil this time.
