The Obvious Comparison
I was going for a run the other day in 25 degree weather and I began thinking about two of the most perplexing people alive at this moment. I mused that maybe I should do a Top Ten list of things that Pope Francis and Donald Trump have in common. But the two main things I came up with is that photographers seem to love to capture their facial expressions and they put their feet in their mouth a lot. So I gave up, even though I knew it would be instructive to point out the similarities of two gentlemen who are so good at surprising, perplexing and making headlines.
So along comes this really good article. It's worth reading, and it details some commonalities of these two super-famous men. Here's the most interesting part to me, something I've been wondering about for some time now:
But iconoclasm, though exhilarating for a while, may not deliver the revitalization it promises. For all his global popularity, the pope has failed to improve the reputation of the church he leads. A Washington Post-ABC News poll found “no evidence that Francis’s likability has boosted Catholic identification, worship attendance or prayer.”
This may be because, as the German writer Martin Mosebach has observed, Francis presents himself as a “dynamic, unconventional, courageous pope with a golden heart” in contrast to a church that is a “crusty, dead, faithless, rigid machine.” Why go to church? Better to follow the pope on Twitter.
That makes me sad; I'm afraid it rings 100% true. I don't hate the Pope the way some people on the Catholic right seem to, but I don't really see him as doing anything that great. He needs a lot of damage control, and no one is coming back to the church because of his "new style".
Obviously this is sort of the feeling I have about Trump. My opinion of him has gone down since he decided to stink up the GOP primaries, but I don't hate him.
I guess the biggest similarity to note is between Catholics who support the Pope and Trump's voters. It doesn't matter if they do or say something cringe-worthy, we still support them. In fact, I would suggest that Donald Trump is already a Pope of sorts, judging from his followers' devotion. But who am I to judge?
While I can certainly see how from the inside Pope Francis - "Frank", as the reverent Gabriel Sanchez refers to him - might draw a comparison with Donald Trump, from the outside he looks a lot more like Bernie Sanders.
ReplyDeleteThere are some significant problems with Matthew Schmitz's article, not least in the concluding paragraph: "If the pope need not follow liturgical or doctrinal rules, why should he follow guidelines concerning sex abuse?" As a matter of fact, yes, the pope -- any pope -- need not follow liturgical or doctrinal rules that exist by the authority of the pope. That's the nature of authority and rules. And pulling sex abuse out of the hat is just Dreherian amygdala-baiting.
ReplyDeleteI think the statement that Pope Francis prioritizes style over substance says more about the author than about the pope, and the reduction of his papacy to sociological iconoclasm is unexpected in the Washington Post but disappointing coming from a First Things editor.
At the risk of appearing to be a "Popekin" (ala a "Trumpkin"), I'll comment on this statement:
ReplyDelete... no one is coming back to the church because of his "new style".
by saying that the whole point of Evangelii Gaudium is that it is up to us, the faithful, to bring people to the Church by our own actions. More so than up to the Pope's style as portrayed in the media.
Each of the popes in my Catholic life (all three!) has challenged me in a way that I needed to be challenged at the time. Pope Francis's challenge is certainly a different challenge, but no less needed.
P.S. You da man, Pauli, for running in 25 degree weather. I fled to indoor tennis this winter, as the mild Dallas winter finally proved too much for me.
Pope Francis's challenge is certainly a different challenge, but no less needed.
DeleteAgree 100%. Whether the Dreherrians and Trumpkins like it or not, social justice *is* part of the Gospel -- a darned important part, per Matthew 25: 31-46. You can sip your French wine, scarf your oysters, sit on your duff, take still-life pix of your books, contemplate your navel, and seek the Uncreated Light till the cows come home, but arguably all of that has a lot less to do with "thickened" Christianity than the pope's words and actions on behalf of the poor.
Yes, correct. And all the popes have stressed this. And all Christians have been doing this for a great long while without help of the government and without "sounding the trumpet" (Matthew 6:2).
Delete