Vatican City, May 22, 2017 / 12:02 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- When Pope Francis was asked last week about his upcoming meeting with U.S. president Donald Trump, he made headlines for answering that he always tries to look for common ground.
Given that they have vocally disagreed on prominent issues in the past, what will the areas of shared agreement be?
The two are set to meet at the Vatican Wednesday, May 24, at 8:30 a.m., before Pope Francis’ weekly general audience.
President Trump arrives to Italy May 23 after stopping in both Saudi Arabia and Israel as part of his first international trip, which lasts nine days. He will also attend a NATO meeting in Brussels on May 25 and a G7 summit in Sicily on May 26.
Perhaps the most prominent area of disagreement between Trump and Francis is immigration.
During a Feb. 18, 2016, in-flight press conference, the Pope was asked to respond to Donald Trump’s immigration stand, particularly his threat to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.
Pope Francis responded saying “a person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian. This is not in the Gospel.” However, he also said that he would “give the benefit of the doubt” to the political candidate.
One week prior, Trump had bashed Pope Francis as a “pawn” for the Mexican government and “a very political person” who does not understand the problems of the United States.
After the fact, then-Holy See spokesman Fr. Federico Lombardi told Vatican Radio that the Pope’s comment “was never intended to be, in any way, a personal attack or an indication of how to vote” and had repeated a longstanding theme of his papacy: bridge-building.
During Trump’s time in office so far, U.S. bishops – who have Francis’ full backing on the issue – have been critical of Trump’s moves on immigration, criticizing the “ban” he implemented in his first week in office halting refugee admissions for 120 days – indefinitely for Syrian refugees – and temporarily banning visa permissions for people seeking entry to the United States from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen.
Trump and Francis also have very divergent opinions on climate change. Francis insisted on the need to protect creation in his environmental encyclical Laudato Si, saying problems such as global warming are caused by human activity.
The Pope gave his full support of the Paris Climate deal in 2015, sending Vatican Secretary of State, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, to the Nov. 30-Dec. 11 summit as his personal delegate to the gathering.
Trump later threatened to back out of the deal, but delayed the process until after the G7 summit he’ll be participating in this week.
While there will certainly be these and other points the two disagree on, there are several issues – other than their shared disregard for formal protocol – that could actually bring the two together.
These, to name a few, could be: pro-life issues, above all defense of the unborn; religious freedom, particularly for Christians in the Middle East; and the push for a solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict.
Since his campaign days, Trump has identified himself as pro-life, and even gave a shout-out to the Jan. 27 March for Life in Washington D.C. in a clip of an interview with David Muir of ABC.
U.S. Vice President Mike Pence became the first vice president to participate in the event, giving a keynote speech that stressed the “sanctity of life.”
Pro-life issues are likely to be at least one strong point of union for Trump and Francis, who has often spoken out against abortion and other concerns such as euthanasia, calling them in one audience in 2014 “sins against God.”
He has also encouraged the use of conscientious objection based on religious convictions, at one point describing it as “a basic human right.”
When it comes to the Trump administration, the pro-life issue remains a big issue for many U.S. Catholics, who praised the president’s reinstatement of the “Mexico City Policy,” which prohibits U.S. funding of non-government organizations that either promote or perform abortions through family-planning funds.
Trump was also lauded for his appointment of Niel Gorsuch to fill the Supreme Court vacancy left when Justice Antonin Scalia passed away last year. Gorsuch has been praised not only for his pro-life stance, but also for his commitment to religious freedom.
Pope Francis and Trump are also likely to share concern for persecuted Christians and other religious minorities in Iraq and throughout the Middle East.
Both Trump and Francis have called for greater solidarity and protection of persecuted Christians.
Francis has repeatedly spoken out on modern persecution, saying there are more martyrs today than in the early Church, with the “ecumenism of blood” having become a watermark phrase of his pontificate.
Trump himself said during his campaign that protecting persecuted Christians would be a priority. As evidence of this intent, at a May 11 summit on persecuted Christians U.S. Vice President Mike Pence said, “We’re with you, we stand with you,” and assured of both his and Trump’s prayers.
As with any political figure, questions still loom as to how much Trump will actually do, especially if differing political opinions get in the way. But overall, the topic will likely be a point of agreement and collaboration with the Vatican.
And while Trump’s previous rhetoric on Islam is something Francis would likely hastily disagree with, a recent shift in the president’s tone is something the Pope would certainly welcome.
During his election campaign, Trump called for the “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States,” and voicing his opinion that “Islam hates us.”
However, so far Trump’s rhetoric on Muslims has cooled during his first international trip abroad.
In his May 21 speech at the Arab Islamic American Summit in Ridyadh, Saudi Arabia, Trump avoided the phrase “radical Islamic terrorism,” referring instead to “the crisis of Islamist extremism and the Islamist terror groups it inspires.”
“The nations of the Middle East will have to decide what kind of future they want for themselves, for their country and, frankly, for their families and for their children,” Trump said, speaking to leaders from more than 50 predominantly Muslim countries.
The choice is “between two futures,” and “it is a choice America cannot make for you,” he said, adding that “a better future is only possible if your nations drive out the terrorists and drive out the extremists.”
He said he didn’t come to “lecture,” but to seek an end to terrorism and the beginning of peace in the Middle East region, noting that roughly 95 percent of terrorist victims are themselves Muslim.
The president said he wants a partnership with people who share the same “interests and values” as the U.S., calling Islam one of the “great faiths” with an “ancient heritage” that has served as the “cradle of civilization.”
In addition, Trump said the problem of terrorism is not “a battle between different faiths, different sects, or different civilizations. This is a battle between barbaric criminals who seek to obliterate human life and decent people of all religions who seek to protect it…This is a battle between good and evil.”
The U.S. president’s more moderate tone on Islam, and indeed his unprecedented praise of some aspects of Muslim culture, is something Pope Francis would likely appreciate. The Pope has on multiple occasions warned against “Islamophobia,” insisting that not all Muslims are terrorist.
However, while the two might have new-found common ground in terms of how they refer to the Muslim community, at least in the public sphere, Francis will likely take issue with the weapons deal signed by Trump and Saudi King Salman.
The deal guarantees the Middle Eastern powerhouse some $350 billion in weapons over the next 10 years, with $110 billion going into effect immediately.
Francis has consistently called for an end to the arms trade, criticizing nations that sell weapons to warring countries in order to keep the conflicts going that line their own pockets. The Pope has used almost countless occasions to insist for an end to this “scourge.”
Saudi Arabia has also been criticized by many other Middle Eastern nations for funding ISIS, most directly through weapons sales.
But regardless of the deal, terrorism is sure to be one of the key topics discussed, and if Trump’s speech in Saudi Arabia is an indication of how he intends to address the issue from here on out, the two just might be able agree on this point.
After leaving Saudi Arabia, Trump flew to Israel for an official visit in a bid to cement Israeli ties and help move forward on a peace deal with Palestine. After arriving this morning, he voiced hopes to Israeli President Reuven Rivlin of a broader peace deal in the region.
“You have a great opportunity right now. Great feeling for peace throughout the Middle East. People have had enough of the bloodshed and the killing. I think we’re going to start see things starting to happen,” he told Rivlin.
In a speech to Israeli Prime Minister on the tarmac, Trump said: “We have before us a rare opportunity to bring security and stability and peace to this region and its people, defeating terrorism and creating a future of harmony, prosperity and peace, but we can only get there working together. There is no other way.”
In a previous encounter, Trump had asked Netenyahu to “hold off” on building more settlements in order help give space to further peace discussions in the region.
Earlier this month Trump met with Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas at the White House, telling him that when it comes to a deal that pleases both parties, “we will get it done.”
The commitment to a two-state solution has been a longstanding priority for the Vatican, which was reinforced during a recent 2015 agreement between Palestine and the Holy See to promote religious freedom in the area.
Trump himself, however, has said his administration is not married to the idea of a two-state solution to the decades-long conflict, deviating from previous administrations on the issue.
While the Vatican and Trump might not agree on what exactly a peace deal looks like, it’s likely to be a shared concern.
Another topic that could be a point of union between the Pope and the president is human trafficking; not necessarily because Trump himself has been a hardliner on the issue, but more likely because the president’s daughter and high-profile adviser Ivanka Trump has made a commitment to it.
It is in this capacity that she is participating in each of the nine days of Trump’s first trip abroad as president, including the public portion of his meeting with Francis.
While in Italy, Ivanka is also set to meet with the Community of Sant’Egidio, a group often praised by Pope Francis for their work with the poor and refugees, to discuss putting an end to human trafficking.
During the meeting, the Ivanka is expected to meet with several women who are victims of trafficking, and discuss various ways in which the Church and the U.S. government can collaborate on the issue.
So while there are clearly many areas in which Pope Francis and Trump diverge, the meeting will likely find both men seeking to find common ground.
Francis himself during his May 13 press conference refrained from making a premature evaluation of Trump, saying “I never make a judgment of a person without listening to them. I believe that I should not do this.”
When the two finally meet, “things will come out, I will say what I think, he will say what he thinks, but I never, ever, wanted to make a judgment without hearing the person.”
Peace and friendship are things that can’t be forced, he said, explaining that they take daily effort and are “handcrafted.”
“Respect the other, say that which one thinks, but with respect, but walk together,” he said. Even if someone thinks differently, “be very sincere,” and respectful.
[…]
They know they can’t remove pages from the Bible. They just say the teachings of the Bible are too hard for some to live in their “complex situations” and thus say we have to make exceptions to the “norm” while at the same time saying the teachings haven’t changed.
Hi, dear ‘JP’: “They just say the teachings of the Bible are too hard .”
You are spot-on: effete church ‘leaders’ see nothing wrong in incorporating the ungodly in The Church, aiming for the numbers, money, & influence that counterfeit recruits are all too willing to supply.
Yet, King Jesus Christ (see Matthew 7:13-14) made it clear that His followers must accept the hardness of The Way that He leads us on. The alternative, easier, popular way leads only to destruction.
Good men & women have never been put off by the prospect of picking up their cross daily to follow our beloved LORD. That is the truth about how things have to be in this world. No one can alter that, not even a pope.
Perseveringly seeking to follow Jesus Christ (a lifetime’s occupation) has always brought out the best in us. This is how God created it to be!
Catholics’ faithfulness to The New Testament, be it ever-so hard, is what invites The Holy Spirit of God to confront the sinful world (John 16:8-11), and that is the whole reason for the existence of The Church.
They lie perniciously in saying: “The Church exists to make the world a better place.”
What is it about Christ’s superb plan that so many church hierarchs are choking on? Why do they sell out for a tawdry and futile impost?
Ever blessed by The Lamb of God; loving prayers from marty
In other words, we don’t dare urge anyone to repent these days (no matter how tactful and prudent we may be). I guess we are to simply “accompany them” as they persist in the mortal sin(s) that can possibly lead them to Hell. 🙄
Say orthodoxy, live heteropraxy.
If the Church preceded the Bible, and if in fact the Bible is the creation of the Church, then it seems to me that the Church can do what She will with it.
.
That would be an incredibly stupid thing to do, but it seems it could be done.
Ah, but the Church did not precede the Word of God, nor can she do with the Word of God what she will (cf CCC 104).
The Bible and The Word of God are not the same thing.
“In Sacred Scripture, the Church constantly finds her nourishment and her strength, for she welcomes it not as a human word, ‘but as what it really is, the word of God’…” (CCC 104)
“For the Sacred Scriptures contain the word of God and since they are inspired, really are the word of God…” (DV 24)
But the Word is Christ, is it (He) not? The Bible refers to that in the Gospel of John.
The Old Testament was written over a long span of time before Christ was born. The New Testament after He died. Actually, there were many “books” written before and after, and somebody (or rather somebodies) had to make a decision on what was to be canon and what was not.
https://www.catholic.com/qa/who-compiled-the-bible-and-when
Come to think of it the Catechism is much the same. There have been many different versions.
I disagree with removing pages from the Bible, but I just don’t see why the Church could not do it.
Mrs. Hess, the Book of Genesis is part of the Bible. It preceded the institution of the Church.
I refer to the Bible as a whole, not individual books
The fact that he would feel obliged to say such a thing is quite disturbing.
What kind of pressures can he be experiencing that would prompt him to even contemplate a Church event that would contravene the Gospel of Christ Jesus?
THIS is a very positive and affirming commentary. Very welcome to this reader. And, we also read a warning: “There is bad press against the Holy Father that’s not fair and that has as its objective the same thing that they try to do in the world, which is class struggle. They want to divide us Catholics from the pope and the pope from Catholics.”
Only “in the world?”
Yours truly recalls in 1994 pointing out this Marxist problem, even within the Church itself, to a visiting priest with a permanent teaching position in Rome. Academically insulated—and now open-mouthed, he had never even thought of it. Ever.
The CONCERN by some is the degree to which synodality in its current formulation might be too welcoming to a populistic and amnesiac vanguard, “walking together” with the “bad press” agenda? Why, for example, is the “non-synod” (!) Synodal Way even at the Synod table in Rome, and already distributing its script? How much of a “paradigm shift” does it take to divide the magisterium and the “hierarchical communion” from itself? Not by simply removing pages from the Bible, but by removing the Church of today from itself (Lumen Gentium)—from even the idea of Tradition, including the accountability and historical fact of the apostolic succession (Mt 28:19-20)?
The subtle AND possibly fatal difference between the “gospel values of Jesus” and the concretely incarnate “Christ of the gospels”—”the same yesterday, today and forever” (Heb 13:8)? With the Holy Spirit not only somewhere out there ahead of us, but already and first indwelling the Church—from the beginning—ever since Pentecost.
TODAY, the mingled risk of intuitionism, and the rescheduled and fictional Third Age of the 12th-century Joachim of Fiore? Or, Pentecost? But hopefully, too, with Archbishop Rodriguez: “the Holy Spirit is working…
“They [bad press] want to divide us Catholics from the pope and the pope from Catholics,..” No.
What divides Catholics is Vatican perverting and subverting of VCII documents. What divides are attempts to paradigmatic shift Church teaching. Undermining and reorienting doctrine to ‘pastorality’ through documents like Amoris, Fratelli, Traditiones Custodes, and Laudate has divided Catholics. Including laity with progressive ideology and non-bishops as voting members in this synod is emblematic of an assault on a teaching and valid synod. Disallowing “good press” sets the agenda and outcome of this papacy’s divisive synod front, center, and in absolutely clear focus.
Counterfeiting, denying, obfuscating, and facilely trying to convince that it has not damaged, stolen, buried, or thrown away any of the Church’s treasure, Rome fools no one of its divisive cause celebre.
Rome has shredded her credibility. Orthodox Catholics detest lying and obfuscating words. We want words of Christ, not of false teachers and their false spirits. Our few good shepherds are persecuted, ignored, ridiculed, denied welcome among the false and so we see abomination in the heart of Rome.
The Church is the Lord’s, and he holds Her dear. True believers fear Him. No one else frightens us.
Communion. CNA’s Sanchez Silva refers twice to the Synod on Synodality’s original 2021 theme, Communion, Participation, and Mission.
Communion within the Church, our bond with Christ is Christ himself in the Holy Eucharist. Today, the feast of a great father, martyr for Christ St Ignatius of Antioch speaks to that bond understood by Ignatius as Christ, who speaks to “deep within” him, “Come to the Father. I no longer take pleasure in perishable food or the delights of this world. I want only God’s bread, which is the flesh of Jesus Christ, and for drink I crave his blood, which is love that cannot perish”(Ignatius in a letter to the Romans). For Ignatius Christ was alive within. He speaks of Christ as the living, resurrected Christ, much like the Apostle Paul. Ignatius was a friend of Bishop Polycarp, a brother martyr saint and apparently according to historical sources, a student of the greatest of the Apostles.
This martyr’s love is consistent with the living presence of Christ in the Eucharist. As the crucifixion was Christ’s absorption of the death penalty we deserved, his resurrection was evidence of our forgiveness. As the Apostle says if Christ had not risen from the dead our faith would be useless. Augustine centuries later would trace that perception in the Fathers calling the resurrection God’s most marvelous work.
Among the faithful there’s a weakness of this awareness of the risen, living Christ, received and alive within us at Holy Communion. It was fitting beyond measure that communion is mentioned first in the original theme. The challenge now is for the conceptual Synodal Church to realize that participation with Christ and our true mission is revealed in the Eucharistic presence of the living Word.
“…our bond with Christ is Christ himself in the Holy Eucharist.” In a Letter to the Ephesians, St. Ignatius of Antioch also finds of the Church a Eucharistic unity:
“…for you are as united with him (the bishop) as the Church is to Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ to the Father, so that all things are in harmony through unity” (St. Ignatius, Letter to the Ephesians, Liturgy of the Hours, Second Sunday of Ordinary Time).
Harmony through unity, rather than unity through editing. Wondering, here, how the “experts” of the Synod will put their Humpty-Dumpty facsimile together again?
Fr. Morello, Thank you for what you have said in this post about the Resurrection. I recently bought and placed a picture of the Holy Face placed beside the Divine Mercy picture and alongside the Eucharist and the Crucifix in our Eucharistic prayer Chapel.I also bought and placed a large statue of the Risen Christ right beside the Eucharist on a separate table. We must have all of Christ. Without the Passion there would be no Resurrection and Divine Mercy. All was done with the parish priests permission.In the Resurrection Christ overcame death and carved a path through it for us to follow Him to Heaven and now I understand it as His sign of forgiveness. Beautiful. If you see I misunderstand any of this please offer me your correction. In JMJ, Diane McHenry
What about all the parts of the Bible we do ignore?
Dear ‘Sher’, was wondering who is the ‘we’ you refer to?
The Catechism of the Catholic Church does a great job in highlighting & explicating the various books of The Holy Bible and the inspired works of our early saints.
Appropriately (since Jesus Christ is One with God The Father & God The Holy Spirit, is The Beginning and The End of all things, & The Reason that all things exist), the CCC majors on HIS life example & HIS instructions by building itself on over 3,500 citations from The Holy Spirit-inspired Apostolic witness of all 27 texts of The New Testament.
You may be right if you mean that many Catholics – both clergy & lay – are shockingly ignorant of The New Testament, having never been informed that it is the very Charter of God’s New Covenant with humanity, the most important text in the entire cosmos.
Perhaps good Catholics have been put off by the faith-destroying & obfuscating ‘scholarship’ of many modern & postmodern, catholic, New Testament academics, who are in breach of the faithful hermeneutic of our Catechism and doubly sin, in betraying Truth and in obstructing & misleading Christs’ little ones.
We really have no excuse. In every Holy Mass that we participate in, the priest and the people all rise to welcome The Gospel with loud Alleluias, and we declare: “Praise to You, LORD Jesus Christ!” Then with serious intent we sign our foreheads with The Cross to declare we believe Christ’s Word, sign our lips in promise to ever declare Christ’s Word, and sign our hearts to say how we will love Christ’s Word above all.
Hopefully, the shock of the present PF-inspired anti-Apostolic crisis in The Church will awake us from our spiritual laziness and sponsor a desire among all Catholics to become thoroughly au fait with The New Testament, personally & parish-wide.
Ever under the glory of God’s Word, King Jesus Christ; love & blessings from marty