This is a moment. It's irrational what he's doing and you know it. Well, it's not irrational to stand up to the Iranian to be called.
It's not a but far-right MAGA figure Scott Jennings was back on Abby Phillips show doing exactly what he does almost every night, acting overly smug, pushing misleading narratives and defending things that are honestly hard to justify. and this time he's trying to defend Donald Trump after he posted an AI generated image of himself as Jesus Christ. So, we're going to look at some clips from this intense panel discussion on Abby Phillips show and I also share my own thoughts along the way.
So, let's dive into and watch it together. Suddenly, Republicans don't want religion in politics. President Trump's war of words with the Pope is again escalating, but this time it's his allies that are doing the talking.
For days, President Trump has criticized the Pope for speaking out against the Iran war, which has received bipartisan backlash. And then, of course, he added fuel to the fire when he posted a picture depicting himself as Jesus. He posted another picture today, but this time he is alongside AI Jesus.
The Pope continues to advocate for peace, even doing so again tonight, while Republican officials are lecturing him on all things theology and doctrine. Now, we can of course have disagreements about whether this or that conflict is just. But I think that it's important in the same way that it's important for the Vice President of the United States to be careful when I talk about matters of public policy.
I think it's very, very important for the Pope to be careful when he talks about matters of theology. You've got to make sure it's anchored in the truth. The pope needs to keep his business into leading his flock, so to speak, leading the church, and probably stay out of the political arena.
He doesn't need to be getting involved in the political arena. Go lead your church. Biden elected the pope to be president.
A pontiff or any religious leader can say anything they want. But obviously, if you wait into political waters, I think you should expect some political response, and I think the pope's received some of that. It's not clear when a life and death war became just politics.
But here we are in this moment for the church and state and war. I mean since when do popes are popes told they can't talk about war. They can't talk about peace.
They can't talk about people who are dying and people who are living all around the world. Since the beginning of the year of our Lord, popes have talked about peace. Whether they were in war times, we were in war times or peace times.
Popes talk about peace. This Christmas, I will get dozens, if not more, of cards that say peace on earth, goodwill towards men. I'm not really sure what is going on in this country, but we have a lot going on.
And to say the pope needs to be careful when he's discussing theology just makes no sense to me. It just really doesn't. The Pope is doing what popes do.
And you know, the president wants a Nobel Peace Prize. He talks about wars that he stopped around the world. Isn't that about peace?
So, I'm not sure what we're doing. Remember, he doesn't need the Nobel Peace Prize. He already got that prize from FIFA.
As a practicing Catholic, I know that the Vatican doesn't operate in our political paradigm. It's in the divine spiritual realm. So, when the Pope sounds like the UN spokesperson, saying no confrontation, no conflict, only peacekeeping, only diplomacy, that is totally normal.
However, we learned this lesson with Pope Francis who waited into politics probably more than any other pope before him, at least in terms of our modern politics. You do have to care about precision and exactitude as the as the the successor to Peter as someone who is informing the opinions of so many lay Catholics. So when you say as the pope and I say this as a practicing Catholic that God does not hear the prayers of those who wage war that is a bit precarious and does risk confusing practicing Catholics because does that mean the war to fight Hitler in World War II was that unjustified?
All right, I need to pause here for a second because this really stands out to me. I was raised Catholic. I went to Catholic school.
And I'm not claiming to be some expert on Catholicism. But everything I was taught growing up was that the Pope is infallible, that what the Pope says goes, that his word carries the authority of God. And I never heard anything different from that until Pope Francis came along.
And suddenly when he started saying things that right-wingers didn't like, the narrative completely shifted. It became this idea that if the pope is saying something they agree with, then it's treated like the word of God. But if he's saying something they don't like, then he's just a regular guy whose opinion can be ignored.
And now it's almost like they're moving the goalposts in real time. I mean, I'm being a bit sarcastic here, but it feels like they're saying, "Well, if Pope Leo speaks out against war, then it only counts depending on where he said it. " Like, if he said it in some specific place, then suddenly it doesn't carry weight and he's just another ordinary person.
And honestly, it feels like they're just making this up as they go along. And it's something that has been incredibly frustrating to watch. It genuinely drives me crazy.
So, I'm curious. Let me know in the comments if you're Catholic or grew up Catholic or went to Catholic school. Were you also taught that the Pope is infallible or was it ever presented to you as something you can pick and choose from?
Because I personally never heard that idea at all until Pope Francis came into the picture. But anyway, let's keep going. Against the Soviet Union, was that unjustified?
I'm just saying that to say that he should be a little bit more precise that that's not like there's rather rather rich for before you jump in Anna there is actual clarity from the Catholic Church on this to your point um and the bishop James Massa the doctrine committee chair so this is straight from the Catholic Church says a constant tenant of that thousand-year tradition is a nation can only legitimately take up the sword in self-defense once all peace efforts have failed that is to be a just war it must be a war of defense against another who active ly wages war, which is what the holy father actually said. Quote, he does not listen to the prayers of those who wage war. So it continues, when Pope Leo speaks as supreme pastor of the universal church, he is not merely offering opinions on theology.
He is preaching the gospel and exercising his ministry as the vicor of Christ. So I he's basically saying in fewer words, the pope is teaching the gospel. Uh he is speaking literally what the just war theory is.
And I guess my question to you is do you think that JD Vance knows more about Catholic theology than the pope? Well, like I hear what you're saying about just war theory that was created by St. Thomas Aquinas and St.
Augustine. And what you're saying is that it has to be proportionate to the actual just to be clear. No, that but that is but that is what that is what just war theory is.
But it's also up to lay Catholics according to the Vatican 2 council, second Vatican council to decide what that means for temporal matters. Just because the Pope makes some sort of dictate on political issues, that's not a religious proclamation. I too am a I too am a Catholic, not a a very flawed one.
Uh granted, when I go to church, it should burst into flames, but here's what I know. In my lifetime, I've known no pope that has more political involvement than John Paul II. He was part of a triumvirate with Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan and beating communism.
He did things like show up in Cuba. He did things like show up in Nicaragua and confront the Sandinistas to their face. So popes have always been political.
It comes with a job. I do think that the job of US president and the job of pope are two completely different things and each of them is speaking to their constituent. Um I think it's ridiculous that we're having like a rational conversation and debate here about theology because the insane, decrepit, scenile old man who's in the White House is posting pictures of himself uh posing like Jesus and uh attacking the pope.
This is, you know, and I think it's rather rich and ridiculous and ironic for JD Vance who is the vice president to the president who is the least careful with words in my lifetime in this country. The man who celebrates death of Rob Reiner and Bob Mueller. The man who cusses on Easter Sunday for now JD Vance wants people to be careful with their words or maybe he should tell the guy he does she have a point about that?
Why, first of all, why criticize the pope and say, "You better be careful with your discussion of theology uh and you your use of words when he's doesn't care whether or not his own boss is careful with his words. " Yeah, I heard the vice president there. I actually think he had it backwards.
Uh I think that the pope should be talking about theology. I respect the pope's role in running the Catholic Church, and I also respect Donald Trump and JD Vance's role in American politics. Uh that's their realm uh in which to be speaking uh their mind.
And so I I thought he had it backwards. It's interesting that you referenced uh Pope John Paul II and and President Reagan. I was thinking about this uh this evening.
There's a tremendous opportunity here for this pope. If he would look at it this way, we're in the middle of a ceasefire. This blockade is working.
There are no bombs falling. There's diplomacy going on right now. And there is a real chance uh because of what Trump has done and the situation we find ourselves in for the world to bring pressure, economic pressure and diplomatic pressure just like what was done in the 80s to bear against this terrorist regime just the way it was brought to bear against the Soviets in the 1980s.
And so I get the feeling sometimes the pope u might be feeling a little adversarial uh at least in some of his comments toward President Trump. I don't know that personally. It's my sense of it.
But in this moment where you have there's no bombs falling right now. there's a blockade, there's some restraint going on, and there's talks going on. This to me is a moment where you could have a partnership for peace in a way that brings this terrorist regime that, by the way, has been at war with the West for nearly 50 years uh to its knees.
And I think just the way they brought the Soviets to their knees, it could happen right now. You think that opportunity goes both ways? In other words, it's also an opportunity for the president of the United States to cultivate an alliance with the leader of the Catholic Church and other uh foreign leaders, frankly, because what he's done by taking on the pope is not just antagonized Catholics.
He's antagonized people like his ally Maloney, the prime minister of Italy, where the Vatican is. It's a fair, you know, it's a fair question. The Reagan the Reagan John Paul II Margaret Thatcher thing was years of cultivation of relationships.
But it's a but it's not not not in the morning tweets but this is a moment. It's irrational what he's doing and you know it. Well, it's not irrational to stand up to the irrational but Navaro is absolutely right in what she's saying here.
Donald Trump comes across as irrational and morally questionable and the Pope has every reason to speak out against that. And based on what Abby Phillip read directly from Catholic Church teachings, it actually supports the idea that the Pope is justified in taking that stance. Because Scott Jennings can throw around talking points about decades of history and bring up Iran and everything else, but the reality is Iran did not attack the United States.
This was presented as an aggressive and controversial war initiated by Donald Trump and the United States. And no matter how much Scott Jennings tries to spin it, that basic fact doesn't change. This wasn't a defensive war.
And the Catholic Church's position essentially suggests that if Iran had attacked first, then the situation would be different. But that's not what happened here. Instead, it was the United States that made the first move and escalated tensions into war.
So, Scott Jennings can talk about peace all he wants. And sure, maybe peace could come at some point, but that's not the current reality. And the situation we're seeing now is tied to military actions taken by the United States, including strikes that have impacted civilian areas like schools, hospitals, and infrastructure.
So the question becomes, does Scott Jennings really expect the Pope to support something like that? Is that really a position he thinks the Pope would take? To threaten a genocide of 90 million people.
Is that rational, Scott? To threaten a genocide of 90 million people on Easter Sunday. That didn't happen.
What do you think meant by that? You know, you know what he's Scott Jennings is simply not telling the truth there. That did not happen the way he's describing it.
and everyone saw it for themselves, not on Twitter, but on Truth Social where Donald Trump posted it directly. So, there's no confusion about what was actually said. And yet, Scott Jennings goes on live TV and says something completely different, which is exactly what he tends to do, pushing misinformation, twisting facts, and bending logic into knots just to defend his point.
That pattern of mental gymnastics and narrative spinning is basically his entire playbook. I'm saying let me let me set reality today. Let me just reiterate to the audience.
The president said in a message that an entire civilization may die tonight on Easter Sunday on he he said that. So a lot of people read that as him threatening to wipe out an entire civilization. So the pope it does seem like the pope would actually be rational to respond to that.
and to hold on and to say, "Hey, we're we shouldn't be in the business of war. " And I think you're right that I'm I'm sure the pope is happy that there is a ceasefire, but he was responding to Trump waging a war. Does he not have a right to respond to that part of it, too?
He has a right to say whatever he wants, but I would just say we're waging war against people who've been waging war against us for nearly 50 years. And look, the reality is in the moment that we're in is special because we've got this regime on its knees economically, which has China uh that's a problem for them as well. Uh we've got a moment here where we can change something and change a situation that's been bad for tens of millions of people uh for going on five decades now.
And I just my my hope is look, by the way, a lot of politicians in America disagree with the pope. Do you guys agree with the pope about abortion and gay marriage? Well, let me say this.
The answer is fine. [laughter] And that's okay. And that's okay.
It happens all the time. But we all disagree with the pope. A lot of people, not everybody's a Catholic.
A lot of people disagree with Donald Trump's not a Catholic. A lot of people disagree with the pope on a lot of documents. He was not in line.
But hang on, hang on, hang on just a second um before we go down that road because we also know that Donald Trump supported abortion before he opposed it. But also, he's been the most pro we've ever had. The the response when you disagree with the Pope is very different from what Donald Trump did.
What Trump said was the pope is weak on crime. The pope he's insulting the man rather than just saying [laughter] I agree with let's not whitewash what actually happened measure the pope by those political measurements. One of the most interesting Hold on.
Hold on Caroline. I'm I'm not understanding. I mean I'm just saying Trump's response to his disagreement is not what anybody else's response is.
Rather than just saying we disagree. The Pope is a you know he's a a figure of the church. I respect his opinion.
We we agree to disagree. He insulted the pope. He attacked him repeatedly on social media.
That is not because that's exactly how Donald Trump operates with pretty much everything. There's no room for disagreement or independent thinking. It's like everyone is expected to fall in line and show complete loyalty to him at all times.
And any form of dissent or criticism is treated as unacceptable and quickly shut down. Because that's what Donald Trump does with any with everything. There can be no disagreement with Donald Trump.
It's you have to bow down to the dear leader at all times and there can never be any disscent. What anybody else frankly I agree with you that there was antagonism. What I'm trying to also say is that they both fueled the fire and if you look at what No, excuse me for and what to say that any war is unjustified.
Abby, do you really believe that? Let me [laughter] ask for the most Wait, what? Around 70% of Americans are against this war.
So Scott Jennings is clearly off when he claims most Americans would disagree with that. And I'm going to pause here because this is already getting pretty long, but you get the overall idea of how this debate played out. If you want to watch the full discussion, you can check it out on CNN on Abby Phillips show.
But I just wanted to highlight something that didn't even get fully addressed there, especially when it comes to Catholics, like the woman on the panel who said she's a practicing Catholic. Because from what I've always understood growing up, people who aren't Catholic might ignore what the Pope says, but if you are a practicing Catholic, then it was always taught as something you follow. It wasn't supposed to be this selective process where you pick what you like and ignore the rest.
And I never heard that kind of thinking until Pope Francis came along. But now it feels like everything turns into these complicated justifications and mental gymnastics. And that's exactly what we keep seeing with Donald Trump and especially with Scott Jennings and others who come on these shows to debate people like Anna Navaro and David Hog who in my view are just presenting straightforward arguments and facts while the other side keeps twisting things to fit their narrative.
And do you agree more with what Anna Navaro and David Hog were saying on Abby Phillips show or do you side with Scott Jennings? Let me know your thoughts, comments.
