Cardinal Vigano Joins President Trump and Tells Pope Leo “He Should Get His Act Together`
Many Catholics say they feel offended and scandalized by statements made by President Donald Trump concerning Leo. At the same time, critics point out that Jorge Bergoglio frequently launched his own attacks and provocations against Trump during his time leading the Church. Trump’s comments also came in the context of remarks made earlier in the week on the CBS program 60 Minutes. During that broadcast, Cardinals Blase Cupich, Robert McElroy, and Joseph Tobin spoke critically about the president. These three church leaders are widely known for their strong support of Bergoglio’s direction for the Church and are often described as progressive figures within the Catholic hierarchy. They have also been connected by critics to networks surrounding the late Theodore McCarrick and are considered close allies and key supporters of Robert Prevost.
When reporters later asked Leo about Trump’s remarks, he responded that he was not afraid of the Trump administration and that he intended to continue proclaiming the message of the Gospel as he believed he was called to do. At first glance, this statement may seem straightforward. However, its meaning can be interpreted in different ways. One interpretation could simply be that the Church should not fear civil authorities and that its spiritual mission stands above political power. Another possible reading is more pointed, suggesting that Leo specifically does not fear this particular administration, which could imply that other governments might inspire caution or restraint.
Critics note that the Vatican has sometimes appeared cautious in its dealings with certain political powers. For example, during past tensions with the United States government, figures such as Hillary Clinton and John Podesta were accused by some observers of exerting influence that affected Vatican financial operations through the SWIFT banking system. Likewise, the Holy See’s relationship with China has long been controversial. The Vatican entered into a secret agreement with the Chinese government that allowed bishops approved by the state-controlled Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association to be recognized, a decision that many traditional Catholics believe compromised the Church’s independence.
Observers also argue that there have been moments when Church leaders remained silent on controversial matters. Some critics believe this silence was influenced by political considerations or by a desire to maintain cooperation with powerful institutions. Tensions between the Trump administration and parts of the American Catholic hierarchy increased when federal funding that had been directed through USAID to Catholic organizations involved in immigration programs was reduced or eliminated. After that change, several bishops and cardinals who had previously maintained cordial relations with Democratic administrations became more openly critical of Trump.
During the years when Democratic leaders such as Barack Obama and Joe Biden were in power, critics say many church leaders avoided confronting policies they opposed, including those related to abortion, LGBTQ issues, and gender ideology. Discussions about excommunicating Catholic politicians who supported abortion rights were largely rejected by the hierarchy, which made clear it had no intention of taking such action.
Because of this context, Leo’s comment that he is unafraid of the Trump administration has drawn additional scrutiny. Some observers say the statement appears inconsistent with his claim that church leaders are not politicians and that the Gospel should not be used for political purposes. They argue that the message of the Gospel can be manipulated not only by televangelists but also by church officials who align themselves with political or ideological agendas.
Critics further claim that certain Vatican initiatives have overlapped with broader global political programs. These include support for environmental policies linked to climate change and the United Nations’ sustainable development goals. Documents such as the encyclical Laudato Si and other initiatives have been interpreted by some as aligning the Vatican with international policy movements often associated with global institutions. President Trump, who has strongly opposed programs such as the UN’s Agenda 2030, has repeatedly criticized these trends.
Despite his insistence that he is not acting as a political figure, Leo’s actions have sometimes appeared political to observers. On April 9 he held a private meeting with David Axelrod, a longtime strategist and advisor to Barack Obama. This meeting prompted speculation among critics about whether American political figures might be attempting to influence Vatican messaging or strategy.
Trump himself publicly responded by urging Leo to focus on spiritual leadership rather than politics. He said the pope should use common sense, stop catering to the radical left, and concentrate on being a strong religious leader rather than a political actor. According to Trump, the current approach is harming both Leo’s reputation and the broader Catholic Church.
Political involvement between the Vatican and governments has a long history. Democratic administrations in the United States have at times been accused of interfering in Church affairs, while critics also argue that Vatican leaders have occasionally involved themselves in American political debates. Bergoglio famously described Trump’s immigration proposals as unchristian. More recently, Leo has spoken about war and conflict, declaring that God blesses no war and that followers of Christ should not side with those who take up weapons.
Some Catholic scholars argue that this position oversimplifies the Church’s traditional teachings on just war. In 2003, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger raised questions about whether modern warfare could still be morally justified given the destructive power of contemporary weapons. Earlier, Pope Pius XII had said that nations facing unjust aggression have the right to defend themselves and that other nations should not remain passive spectators when injustice occurs.
Critics say Leo’s broad condemnation of all war risks undermining the concept of legitimate self-defense. In their view, denying that any war can be just effectively removes the moral distinction between aggressor and victim. They see this approach as similar to other controversial developments within the Church, such as statements suggesting that all religions are equal, changes in pastoral teaching about moral issues, or opposition to capital punishment.
If Leo were to speak more firmly using the traditional language of Catholic doctrine, critics argue he might face opposition from both political progressives and certain conservative factions. The current acceptance of the Church by many political forces, they claim, depends on its willingness to cooperate with broader global agendas promoted by institutions such as the United Nations, the World Economic Forum, and initiatives like the Council for Inclusive Capitalism.
Some observers also believe the rise of Robert Prevost within the Church was carefully managed by Bergoglio to ensure continuity with his policies. Prevost, originally from Chicago, spent many years working in Latin America and has been associated with progressive theological movements. Critics argue that his election represented a continuation of the reforms and ideological direction introduced during Bergoglio’s leadership.
Support for Leo from mainstream media outlets and certain Catholic commentators has also drawn attention. According to critics, many of the voices praising him would likely turn against him if he challenged the core positions of the modern political left. They argue that Leo’s political statements risk weakening the moral authority of the papacy by turning it into a participant in partisan debates.
For these critics, Trump’s warning that Leo should concentrate on spiritual leadership reflects a deeper concern about the direction of the Church. They believe that powerful political and financial interests have gained influence within the Vatican and are determined to maintain it.
The situation, they argue, reflects a broader spiritual crisis in which religious authority is increasingly entangled with political agendas. In their view, the Church’s role should be to uphold moral truth rather than align itself with ideological movements.
They conclude that Christians must look at current events from a spiritual perspective rather than through political illusions. Only by doing so, they say, can believers maintain inner peace during turbulent times and remain faithful to the teachings of Christ.
https://newsbeyonddetroit.net/2026/04/19/cardinal-vigano-joins-president-trump-and-tells-pope-leo-he-should-get-his-act-together/
***Thank you for this very important response that describes exactly the situation we are dealing with.
Who was it that said:
"HE IS NOT MINE"
