Was the pope wrong to suggest Trump is not a Christian?

[Lux]

This is a four-month old story, but I've been thinking about this incident still. Would it be not okay for a Christian to call other Christians "not Christian", even if there's a good reason for doing so?

Fr. Jonathan Morris (I usually agree with him but not on this one) says in the YouTube clip below that the pope made a mistake ... and he should apologize to Trump for his comment. Really? I somehow don't think so.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMPZodJIppY

Well, okay ... I admit I'm totally and completely biased against Trump (with good reasons! I might add), perhaps that's why I didn't find anything wrong with what the pope said about Trump. IOW, I'm not being fair and lacking the ability to judge the situation dispassionately ...

I'm one of those now-sadly-a-minority Republicans who aren't against legalizing undocumented immigrants. I find Trump's approach to immigration policies heartless. I'd think all Christians should know Jesus preached about being compassionate, reaching out to those who're underprivileged. And Christians are called to emulate Jesus.

Well, I guess I can see the arrogance in decisively saying someone is not a Christian, when only God knows the heart of the individual, but I still think sometimes one can't help saying "that's not Christian" ...

One of the biggest grievances I have with Trump is that he calls himself a strong Christian and boasts "I have a great relationship with God", but I don't think he takes Christianity that seriously. Here are the reasons :

He said, to fight against terrorism, we should "target" non-combatants (terrorists families).

He hesitated to condemn the KKK (getting their votes is more important than standing up to the hate group).

He says "No one reads the Bible more than me" and doesn't mind profiting from the sex industry at the same time (there's a strip club in the Trump Taj Mahal).

He bragged about having affairs :
". . . if I did [write about my love life], the world would take serious notice. Beautiful, famous, successful, married — I’ve had them all, secretly, the world’s biggest names . . . If I told the real stories of my experiences with women, often seemingly very happily married and important women, this book would be a guaranteed best-seller ..."

He questions if repentance is necessary :
"Why do I have to repent, why do I have to ask for forgiveness, if you are not making mistakes?" (Obviously Trump thinks having an affair is neither a mistake nor wrong.)

Even based on these "facts", would it still be wrong to say, "He doesn't sound like a Christian to me" ... (well, I softened the expression a little.)

 

[Devils' Advocate]

"Why do I have to repent, why do I have to ask for forgiveness, if you are not making mistakes?"

This quote says everything one needs to know about who and what Trump is. He doesn't make mistakes. He has never done a deed that required him to ask for forgiveness. He's that good. A legend in his own mind.

Nobody this arrogant and stupid has the capability of being a good Christian, or even being a good human being for that matter. Do I know what is in his heart? Nope. Do I care? No. Actions speak louder than words and his actions leave no doubt what kind of man he is.

What aggravates me is when he makes asinine comments like "No one reads the Bible more than me" - nobody calls him on it. Why doesn't someone ask him to recite a part of the Bible. Any part will do. Cause he will not be able to answer the question. He is more ignorant about the world than Sarah Palin, and I didn't believe that was possible.

 

[wil]

I think the pope is limited to saying he is not a good Catholic.... that is the only place the pope resides over...

Of course he could refer to him as a buffoon if he wishes.

 

[Lux]

Of course he could refer to him as a buffoon if he wishes.

Buwahaha ... I would LOVE to hear the pope say that! That would be invigorating!

 

[Devils' Advocate]

I thought it was interesting that of all the 200 Republicans running for President, and the 5 Democrats, the only one the Pope invited to visit was Bernie Sanders.

 

[Namaste Jesus]

You know, as I read yet another Donald Trump related post, I just have to laugh. You guys are playing right into Trump's hands. He's gotten so far in this campaign simply because of his unprecedented ability to garner free publicity. The worldwide media gives it to him. The talks show hosts give it too him. Even the Pope gives it to him! And now this forum has followed suit. His antics are on everyone's mind. It's just comical.

By criticizing him, you're keeping his name in the forefront and adding fuel to his fire. It's like trying to punish an exhibitionist by pulling his pants down. He loves it and secretly so does everyone else. There is an implied creditability for those worthy of comment. The more comments, the more that perception of creditability grows. Just like criticizing the Bible tends to have the opposite effect. It strengthens the faith of the devoted and prompts the not so devoted to take a closer look.

I doubt anything said by, for or against either candidate will decide the election and I'm not even sure it matters. If history tells us anything, it's that neither will follow through with their campaign promises or at the very least be able to implement them as originally intended. Obama is living proof of that. Still, there is a big difference between Hilary and the Donald. If elected, Trump is going to hire the best of the best to run the country for him. Hilary on the other hand is going to try to do it on her own.

 

[Lux]

I agree with your first two paragraphs, but not the last one. I even kinda doubt if Trump really wants the presidency. It's not an easy job (to say the least!!) and one has to almost completely sacrifice one's private life. Do you think he is up for that?

The primaries are over, Trump needs to be reaching out to the voters he's offended, or are iffy about him. If he wants their votes, why in hell did he make such a misstep as calling the judge "a Mexican and a hater"? Trump is either galactically stupid or, as some speculate, is trying to lose the election, 'cuz he doesn't really want the job. Now Hillary is five to ten points ahead in multiple polls because people are appalled with his display of bigotry and racist nonsense.

To win the general, Republicans need to flip both Blue and swing states to Red. Hillary has a significant advantage in the electoral college. Trump's drastic policies on immigration scare the hell out of minorities. He's alienating "the very voters we need" to make more states Red. Also Trump doesn't seem to be making much effort getting Gov. Kasich and Martinez's endorsements either.

So yeah, what's Trump doing?? To me, it's not so far-fetched to think he's trying to get out of this. He over-achieved what he wanted (gaining public recognition) and he's now afraid that he may actually have to "build a wall" and "make Mexico pay for it", since his supporters are gonna hold him to that if he is elected, the idea he knows to be cockamamie, but used it to get attention.

 

[Devils' Advocate]

If elected, Trump is going to hire the best of the best to run the country for him. Hilary on the other hand is going to try to do it on her own.

You mean like he personally hired the best of the best to teach at Trump Academy? PUHlease.

And I hate to break this to you but Clinton can't do it all on her own. No human being could. She will hire the people to do the job of carrying out her objectives just like any other President in the history of the country.

 

[Namaste Jesus]

So yeah, what's Trump doing?? To me, it's not so far-fetched to think he's trying to get out of this.

Could be. Remember Ross Perot? Wealthy business man runs for president and when it looks like he might actually win he bows out. Then returns, but picks a senile old coot to be his running mate to negate the possibility of winning.

And I hate to break this to you but Clinton can't do it all on her own.

Don't tell me, she's the one that needs convincing. She seems to be under the impression all she needs to do is follow in Obama's footsteps.

 

[Thomas]

You know, as I read yet another Donald Trump related post, I just have to laugh...

We learned that lesson. Here we had Nigel Farage, who got himself into the media by continually saying we'll be flooded with foreigners, etc., and who posed for cameras with a pint of beer in his hand.

So an educated, self-made businessman, poses as 'one of the guys' and leads the 'keep Britain British' campaign, even though his name and his wife are definitely foreign!

But the media couldn't get enough of him. They gave him plenty of exposure to show what a twit he is, and the reverse happened, because he was so present in the media, he's obviously a contender, isn't he? I mean, why would the media give so much space to an idiot, so he must be saying something right!

And he ended up the poster boy of the Brexit campaign, when he's not even an elected member of the UK parliament.

Laughably, one argument of the leave campaign was the lack of representation in Europe. That's probably because they didn't bother to vote for their choice of representative in the European elections, and don't even know they've got one ... but everyone in the country knows Farage ...

 

[Thomas]

I think the pope is limited to saying he is not a good Catholic....

Not really. He's looked to globally as a spokesperson for Christianity.

 

[Thomas]

This is a four-month old story, but I've been thinking about this incident still. Would it be not okay for a Christian to call other Christians "not Christian", even if there's a good reason for doing so?

Of course it's OK for a Christian to confront hypocrisy — Jesus did it all the time!

I think the apposite comment here is: "This person honors me with his lips, but his heart is far from me" (cf Isiah 29, Matthew 15, Mak 7).

 

[wil]

Not really. He's looked to globally as a spokesperson for Christianity.

Us ugly Americans look at him as the spokesperson of Catholicism... not Christianity. But that is us....us noncatholics... Catholics world round think he is the spokesperson for Christianity... the Protestants are still Protesting.

Although along with JPII we like this guy.

 

[BigJoeNobody]

Of course it's OK for a Christian to confront hypocrisy — Jesus did it all the time!

I think the apposite comment here is: "This person honors me with his lips, but his heart is far from me" (cf Isiah 29, Matthew 15, Mak 7).

Similar to:

And of the people are some who say, "We believe in Allah and the Last Day," but they are not believers.

They [think to] deceive Allah and those who believe, but they deceive not except themselves and perceive [it] not.

Quran 2:8-9

 

[Thomas]

Us ugly Americans look at him as the spokesperson of Catholicism... not Christianity. But that is us....us noncatholics... Catholics world round think he is the spokesperson for Christianity...

LOL. I didn't say 'the', I said 'a' ... and Christians round the world see him as a spokesperson for Christianity, which is both reasonable and understandable, in the circumstance. I'm afraid we don't see any American voices there ... only Americans speaking for Americanism.

the Protestants are still Protesting...

LOL, are they? Actually I think the ties are closer than ever they were ...

Although along with JPII we like this guy.

Well the world is a sucker for a catchy soundbite.

Dare I say it, but I was never too much a fan of JPII. Too conservative for me. His Theology of the Body was something to admire, but too easily harnessed to the views of the right-wing lobby.

Benedict XVI didn't have the pastoral 'touch' and knew from the outset he wasn't the man for the job and didn't want it. Too intellectual. He set about putting the problems to rights, and was more out-spoken than any of his predecessors, but he wasn't a game-player and didn't have Vatican support, so they worked against him. His three encyclicals are really forward-thinking, his comments on man's eschatological position are ground-breaking ...

Also, he 'carried the can' for JPII, remember it was he who promoted Ratzinger to the role of 'Vatican Rottweiler' and wrote his brief ... an astute move on JPII's part, in my book.

When Francis was elected, mum said, 'Oh-ho, watch out, here comes a Jesuit!'

He's a canny guy, but then he's been dealing with South American politics, so there's a tough school. He's gone from hardline conservative of the elite to champion of the people. When they made him bishop and he got involved with 'the real church' and pastoral affairs. We had monks at Maryville who when in South America would lead the local shanty-town populations in occupying land and then fight for their rights to stay there through the courts. When he started, Francis was the enemy of the brand of Christian social justice called 'liberation theology', but once he began talking to the people, he had his Damascus moment...

To be honest I'd have thought he's way too 'literal' and 'superstitious' for the likes of you – – his outlook is soo South American! (Read Allende or check out 'magical realism', that's the world he inhabits, in mystical rather than magical terms). He's way too 'mystical' for some refined European tastes, he talks about the Devil too much, for a start.

But he has the popular touch and he walks the walk he chooses to walk, and although the media bangs on about him over-turning Christian doctrine, he hasn't. (He's also declares Papal Infallibility more than any predecessor when in dialogue with his bishops. He told them to go away and come back with a plan. When they did, he didn't like the plan and told them to go away and come back with another one, and when they complained he said 'I'm the pope ... ')

I fear the day the media suddenly decides he's not the hero they've made him out to be ... check in with me again after that.