[hmm37]

Even if US seems like it's acting in bad faith here, I rather the Pope not step into politics of this sort and concentrate more on the religious realm. It seems like the papacy would be stepping backwards if it got more involved in politics/geopolitics again, and not simply looking for peace.

[krapp]

Politics and religion are inextricably linked in the West, and as much as I wish it were otherwise Evangelical Christianity is the engine that drives American conservatism and foreign policy and the opinions of religious leaders like the Pope matter to millions of people.

If the Republicans get to claim to be the party of Christian virtue and anointed by God then the Pope weighing in on American policy seems like fair game, even if the US is far more Protestant than Catholic.

And "looking for peace" is no less a political stance than "crusade against the infidels."

[scrubs]

You're basically right. But here's an argument to get to a renewed commitment to the good stuff in religion: the catholic church needs accountability if it gets into politics. When things move from blabbing talking points and mere POV from Rome to make it work ... I think things would change. Either they'd retreat and focus on religion or move far more strongly to avoid wars in the first place through religious instruction.

Without accountability blurbs here and there from politicians, pope's, clerics are like what a recent HN article calls being lost in the world of symbols and symbol references i.e. practical nonsense.

You can't really get to know a player unless they've got skin in the game. Short of that it's shadow boxing.

[tim333]

The vatican got some grief for not criticising Hitler and hence making it easier to do holocausts and the like. Maybe they feel they should avoid that sort of thing?

[watwut]

Pope did some little Hitler criticising, just not enough and Vatican kept neutrality. Meanwhile catholic priest Tiso became a president and literally presided over killing of Slovak Jews and their persecution.

Today you have catholic priests openly promoting semi fascist politicians and parties. Pope is taking side in that too.

You dont see people who want pope to be super neutral take issue with these. You dont see them take issue with Vance using his catholicism to tie his policies to catholicism.

What US is doing now is not an abtract politics eith no tie to religion - they claim to speak for European christianity. If pope stay silent, it will ve taken as confirmation.

[whattheheckheck]

If religion provides rules for behavior that is inherently political. Welcome to the game

[watwut]

If Pope steered clear of politics, he would be just leaving a space for J.D. Vance who is literally trying to use religion to promote fascism. It is ok for pope to act as counterweight against cristo-fascism.

Klerofascism is a thing and if pope does not want the catholic church going that way, he has to. Trump, J.D.Vance and Steven Miller dont get to pretend they speak for religion.

[sillyfluke]

Yes, this is a simple point that possibly warrants exception to the rule that many people seem to dismiss too easily. Whether you agree with it or not, Trump is taking Europe to task for not standing strongly enough for Judeo-Christian values. When he says Europe is facing "civilization erasure", it's not like he is worried about the erasure of Islamic civilization. If you're weaponizing religion for your politics you shouldn't be surprised if the shepherd gets annoyed. It is a delicate dance regardless though.