Much has been made about the recent social media post made by President Donald Trump criticizing Pope Leo XIV as being “WEAK on Crime, and terrible for Foreign Policy.” In typical Trump-responsive fashion, many expressed outrage at the gall of the president to criticize the leader of the Catholic Church. Political charlatans rebuked Trump, accusing him of many false things that accompany hyperbolic and senseless condemnations predicated on emotional outbursts and not facts or reality. Because while many immediately rushed to vilify Trump, we must acknowledge the facts: The pope attacked Trump first, not the other way around.
An honest assessment of the feud, free of pearl-clutching hysteria or performative outrage, requires an objective review of the pope’s rhetoric. To understand the tension between the Vatican and the White House, one must go back several months, to at least October, when Leo attacked Trump over illegal immigration enforcement operations in the United States.
Leo on U.S. illegal immigration enforcement
The pope, who lives in Vatican City, which is mostly surrounded by a massive wall and has arguably one of the world’s most stringent immigration laws, scolded the president for bringing accountability to those who entered the U.S. illegally. The pontiff thought enforcement efforts were cruel and called for U.S. bishops to be “more united and more forceful” on protecting illegal immigrants.
Around the same time, Leo, again, attacked the president and his administration, questioning whether those who support the “inhuman treatment of immigrants in the United States” are really “pro-life.” Meanwhile, at this time, there do not appear to be any comments or papal directives on the lives of Laken Riley, Rachel Morin, Jocelyn Nungaray, or any of the other innocent women brutally killed by illegal immigrants whom U.S. federal immigration enforcement efforts seek to remove from the country.
This past October was one of the first times the pope aggressively criticized Trump. And how did Trump respond? In a December interview with Politico, Trump claimed he was not aware of the pope’s comments on his administration’s immigration tactics and said, “I’m sure he’s a lovely man.”
Leo on U.S. military intervention to remove Maduro
Also, in December, the Vicar of Christ again attacked Trump, this time questioning his strategy and plan for military operations against Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro. Leo suggested that Trump champion diplomacy and urged him to resolve differences through “dialogue” and nonviolent “pressure.” After Trump approved the U.S. military operation that captured Maduro, Leo was once again overtly critical of the president. The pope expressed “deep concern” over removing Maduro — a brutal dictator who stole a presidential election and regularly committed acts of violence and oppression against his citizens — instead of heralding his removal.
Leo’s sanctimonious commentary was becoming a regular occurrence at this point. The pontiff seemingly never offered positive feedback on Trump’s accomplishments, which were arguably making the world a safer, fairer, and more just place. And yet, Trump said little, if anything, in response to the pope’s attacks.
Leo’s criticism of the Iran war
Weeks after the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps allegedly killed thousands of Iranian citizens who engaged in protests against the regime — an occurrence of which the usually vocal Leo was conspicuously rather quiet on, especially when compared with the pontiff’s frequent comments about the U.S. president — Trump authorized Operation Epic Fury, a joint military operation with Israel against Iran. Naturally, in what could legitimately be considered almost reflexive at this point, Leo once again attacked Trump. He did not criticize Iran, accused of killing thousands of its own people; he criticized the president even though Trump’s objective is to stop the evil theocratic regime.
During a noon Angelus prayer from the Vatican on March 15, Leo called for a ceasefire for “those responsible for this conflict.” It was an appropriate request from the leader of the Catholic Church who wanted to see an end to the violence. However, nonverbal cues suggested that the root of Leo’s disdain was actually Trump, not the Iranian regime.
TRUMP LOOKS TO CORRECT ‘GENERATION OF GOVERNMENT UNDERINVESTMENT’ IN DEFENSE INDUSTRIAL BASE
“On behalf of the Christians of the Middle East and all women and men of good will, I appeal to those responsible for this conflict,” the pope said. “Cease fire so that avenues for dialogue may be reopened. Violence can never lead to the justice, stability, and peace that the people are waiting for.” A week later, Leo once again criticized the Iran war, calling it a “scandal to the whole human family” and demanding that airstrikes be halted.
Final thoughts and the Pope’s disingenuous pontif-icating
Again, there was no papal criticism of the Iranian regime that oppressed its citizens or co-sponsored acts of terrorism throughout the Middle East. Leo’s comments focused on the overall military conflict, coyly avoiding naming countries or leaders. He did, however, criticize the unfortunate tragedy of the erroneous military strike on an Iranian school. And while a pope commenting on such a tragedy would not be unexpected, it should raise flags that Leo, once again, reserved his strongest criticism for Trump, not for the murderous Iranian regime.
The pontiff has been looking to pick a fight with Trump for months now. Anyone not admitting this is denying reality. If the pope wants to make critical comments about Trump — especially while not criticizing murderous tyrannical regimes with the same vigor he does a U.S. president — then he should expect criticism in return. And if Leo wants to take on the identity of a strong, vociferous pontiff, he should consider speaking out loudly against those brutally killing innocent people or sponsoring terrorist paramilitary groups in the Middle East.