What about the Influence of the Pope over United States Policy?

The United States and the Pope

Sometimes, but not much, I deliver my opinion on what’s happening in government and politics.  People should consider and apply what God says about everything.  The recent Roman Catholic Pope, Leo XIV, came out against President Trump in recent days.  If I can and should say and write about these matters, then why not the Pope too?  I have a concern with the Pope’s speech, but it is not just that the Pope speaks, but that he speaks with claimed authority that conflicts both with biblical teaching and with American constitutional independence.

United States Presidents

From its earliest days, the United States viewed Roman Catholicism with deep suspicion. The founders distrusted papal authority and colonial-era Americans associated the Catholic Church with monarchy, tyranny, and foreign allegiance.  The United States has not been Roman Catholic.  It is a minority religion and way of thinking in the U. S. Not until John F. Kennedy did the United States ever elect a Roman Catholic, but not without assurances that he would not obey the Pope in matters of national policy.  He guaranteed that in his campaign.  He said:

I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute, where no Catholic prelate would tell the president how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote.

He also said:

Contrary to common newspaper usage, I am not the Catholic candidate for President. I am the Democratic Party’s candidate for President who happens also to be a Catholic.

The opposition to a Roman Catholic president was whether someone who owed spiritual obedience to a foreign sovereign — the Pope in Rome — would obey the Constitution and represent the people of the United States.  The first Catholic major presidential candidate was Al Smith — a New York City politician of working-class origin who, after serving four terms as Governor, earned the Democratic Party nomination for president.  He was defeated in a landslide.

Supreme Court Justices and Diplomatic Relations

Roger Taney (1836-1864), infamous for the Dred Scott decision, was the first Catholic Supreme Court Justice and Chief Justice.  There have been 15 Catholic Supreme Court Justices in U. S. history, almost half of which (six) sit on that bench right now.  Gorsuch was raised Catholic, which would make seven.  Not until the 20th century was there considered a “Catholic seat” on the Supreme Court.

In 1959 Dwight Eisenhower became the first U.S. president to visit the Vatican, meeting Pope John XXIII.  Despite this diplomatic engagement, it was once considered unthinkable for American presidents to be seen with the Pope, with anti-Catholic cartoons suggesting that Catholics would use political power to dismantle the nation’s institutions.  It was only in 1984 — under President Ronald Reagan — that the U.S. and the Vatican established full diplomatic relations. Then the idea of an American ambassador to the Vatican was politically toxic.

In 2004, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger — who would later become Pope Benedict XVI — instructed American bishops in a confidential memorandum that communion must be denied to Catholic politicians who support legal abortion.  Joe Biden became the second Catholic president in 2020, and Roman Catholic JD Vance assumed office as vice president in 2025.  From many Roman Catholics’ perspective, Biden didn’t behave like a Catholic, so there wasn’t much controversy over his religion with non-Catholics.  And now the Pope and President Trump.

The Criticism of Trump by Two Popes

Both of the last two Roman Catholic Popes criticized President Trump directly and publicly.  In 2016, Pope Francis criticized Trump over his pledge to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border, 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.

Francis then told reporters in a midflight press conference:  “I’d just say that this man is not Christian if he said it in this way.”  Trump responded at the time by calling the Pope’s comments “disgraceful” and saying no religious leader should question another man’s faith.  The opposition of the Pope didn’t hurt Trump politically, as he received 55% of the Roman Catholic vote in the United States in the 2024 election.

No Pope has made a direct statement by name against a United States President like Leo XIV.  It is unprecedent in its directness.  He named Trump directly three times over the Iran War.  Popes typically speak about global affairs in broad terms, avoiding direct criticism of specific heads of state.  Leo went on to say, “The message of the Gospel is very clear: ‘Blessed are the peacemakers,'” quoting from the Sermon on the Mount.  The current Trump-Leo XIV exchange stands as the most explicit and public clash in the entire history of U.S.-Vatican relations.  What about it?  What’s the problem?

What’s the Problem with the Pope?

A lot of divides exist between Bible believing and practicing Christianity and “a” or “the” Pope.  It is difficult to say what are the biggest.  Trump went right back at the Pope, speaking to him as if he didn’t have authority over the United States President.  American citizens should be happy about that.  No Pope should be telling an American President what to do.  The United States is not under the Pope.  I believe this is very serious in the matter of separation of church and state.  It isn’t that someone cannot make a statement of criticism or opposition to a policy.  It’s specific to the Pope himself and Roman Catholicism.

What if Trump changed his policy to please the Pope?  Is that right?  Do Americans support that?  He can have his opinions, but he shouldn’t be telling an American President what to do.  I’m already concerned about the Roman Catholic influence on the United States in an official capacity in whatever fashion it occurs.  There have been no Supreme Court justices in U.S. history who have publicly identified as evangelical.  Why does there need to be a Catholic seat or seats?  Why can’t evangelicals profess their own beliefs and still get a seat on the Supreme Court?  Where is the freedom for evangelicals?

There is a difference when the Pope comes out with a pronouncement.  He of all people should know this, and likely he does, which makes this even worse.  He quoted the Sermon on the Mount and called it the Gospel, just like Francis referred to the Gospel in his criticism of Trump’s immigration policy.  There is so much wrong with both of these opinions and their misuse of the term Gospel and of the concept of peacemaking.  No one should feel afraid to come back at a Pope when he twists and perverts the Bible for his own purposes, and yet this is part of the concern over this, isn’t it?

The Final Say on Matters

Probably the biggest divide between Roman Catholicism and biblical Christianity is about who or what has the final say on matters.  In 1870 the First Vatican Council declared Papal Infallibility.  If the Pope is infallible, the Roman Catholic Church can never admit it was wrong.  Rome has elevated the Pope to a position where he cannot be corrected by scripture.  Also, the Papacy claims by law an authority that belongs only to Christ.  The Pope claims the title “Holy Father.” Jesus used the term “Holy Father” only once — in John 17, referring to God the Father. For a man to take that title is blasphemous.

Americans should react in harsh fashion to a Pope intervening in American policy when most Americans do no believe the Pope has authority at all.  He is under the authority of the Word of God.  When it comes to scripture, the Pope and Roman Catholicism has a very bad, horrific record on this.  The Papacy is the head of a system that officially condemns the Gospel, which this Pope now uses to belittle and cower the United States president.

Unbiblical Roman Catholic Positions

The Pope of the Roman Catholic Church presided over the Council of Trent, which issued anathemas against anyone who believes in justification by faith alone.  The Papacy officially cursed the heart of the Gospel, the Pope cannot be the “Vicar of Christ.” Instead, the office stands in opposition to the very message Peter preached.  The true church, which Jesus called “my church,” Jesus built from the true gospel espoused by Peter, upon which Jesus said He would build His church.  The Roman Catholic Church and the Pope opposes the one and only, true gospel.

It is rich that the Roman Catholic Church and the Pope says He opposes war.  He said nothing about Iran’s killing of tens of thousands of its own citizens.  This similar to the many Inquisitions of the Roman Catholic Church, which killed many people for expressing their beliefs in the Bible.  Catholic Rome killed more actual Christians than secular Rome.  The Catholics killed eight million in the Thirty Years War.  They killed 100,000 Huegenots in France in one day, while in their beds, in the St. Bartholomew’s Day massacre.  What about the forced conversions by their Conquistadores?

True Authority from Scripture and a True Gospel

The Bible, God’s Word, has authority.  It’s also not just using the text like a cudgel.  The authority of scripture comes through the grammatical-historical meaning of the text, its plain meaning, not an allegorical, spiritualized, and relativistic meaning to conform to woke ideology.  The peacemaking, which Jesus expresses in the Sermon on the Mount, is not social justice and anti-war pronouncements.  Jesus is not referring to a politician, a diplomat, or someone who simply stops a fight.

A biblical peacemaker, of which Jesus was preaching, is one who brings the Gospel of Peace to a world at war with God. The peace in view is the ending of the enmity between the sinner and the Creator (Romans 5:1).  This peace is never achieved at the expense of truth. Jesus said, “I did not come to bring peace, but a sword” (Matthew 10:34), meaning that the truth of the Gospel often causes division.  A “peacemaker” is an evangelist. You cannot have “peace” with someone while leaving them in a state of rebellion against God’s Word.  The Pope himself is in rebellion against the only true Gospel and God’s Word.

Papal Authority

Because of his assumed authority, Pope Leo XIV doesn’t just take another opinion with such a direct pronouncement.  His doctrine says it is infallible and must be obeyed.  If not, then where are the statements against what he said, calling it for what it is, reproving and correcting this man, who is no mediator between God and man?  Catholics and politicians, except for Trump, just dance around the Pope and what He said for fear of offending him.  This is exactly the trouble with the Pope speaking.

If I criticize a president, I go to the Bible.  I make an argument, not a pronouncement or declaration.  For me, since I’m under the authority of God’s Word, I have to prove my point.  The Pope just says things, and actually stupid things, things that get millions of people killed.  The left, MSNOW, Democrat pollsters. Obama, and David Axelrod celebrate.  Who else can say things like the Pope and there is the idea or concept that he can say no wrong?  This is at the basis of his action and he chooses to use it against an American President.  The United States should rise up against actual authoritarianism.  Forget No Kings — No Popes!!

The Practice of Papal Authority

In the history of the Roman Catholic Church, politicians bow to the Pope.  The Pope forced Henry VIII to start a new religion, the Anglican Church, the religion of Neil Gorsuch, the Supreme Court Justice.  Henry VIII killed many people with total authority, as you know, because he saw his authority then in England like the Pope’s in Rome.

The emperor Charlemagne cemented the idea that political legitimacy required papal sanction.  King John III of England surrendered England and Ireland as papal fiefs to gain the Pope’s protection against French invasion.  Pope Pius VII came to Napoleon’s coronation, the latter taking the crown from the Pope’s hand to crown himself, quite fittingly related to papal authority.

The Pope can excommunicate people from the church for opposing him.  He has supreme authority in his position.  This affects many people in a very bad way, keeping them frozen in their false gospel, prepared for future damnation.  They stay tethered to a church and what I’ve found hundreds of times, saying, “I’ve got to ask my priest.”  The authority is the religion itself.  It tells its people what to think.  This is not making disciples, who know the Word of God.  Roman Catholics usually haven’t read it and a tiny number know it.  They wait to hear what the Pope will say.

No Pope Here in the United States

I believe we should bring out into the open the problem of the Pope.  Our Constitution allowed freedom to Roman Catholics, unlike Roman Catholics gave to Bible believers who fled religious persecution from them.  Baptists did not return the favor.  Catholics still have their freedom.  Today a movement of Catholic Integralism rejects the traditional separation of church and state, arguing that the two should be unified under a hierarchical order to serve the common good as defined by the Church.  When we talk about Christian nationalism, one-third of white Catholics support their version of it.

All true Bible believers should call on the Pope to stop in his attempts to control the American people through his declarations.  He truly should stay in his lane, if he will not even better repent and receive the true gospel of Jesus Christ. The United States started with people who fled the state church stranglehold in Europe.  Perhaps as part of the Monroe Doctrine and a corollary Trump doctrine, we could call on him to stop intervening in our affairs.  I thank him for his kind consideration of this matter.