What the He___?

The mainstream media along with more prestigious publications such as Foreign Affairs have lambasted Donald Trump for upsetting the “world order,” pulling out of TPP, threatening to pull out of NAFTA, and calling into question military alliances such as NATO.   Respected “experts” such as Adam Posen have attacked the Trumpian “America First” doctrine in trade relations (see The Post-American World Economy; April 1 Foreign Affairs) and Richard Haass has been critical of Trump in foreign policy.   They argue that, while not perfect, these relationships have, on balance, served us well and have strengthened us economically and have kept us more secure.  Trump has threatened to disrupt the “world order.”

But not to be outdone,  Pope Francis,  apparently and without warning that the issue was even under consideration, abolished Hell during Holy Week.  Now the Vatican and other archdiocese are scurrying around, claiming that it is not true, that Pope Francis was misquoted in an interview, and that the official Vatican position is that Hell does, in fact, exist.   But the fact that other Catholic authorities had to make clarifying remarks about the existence of Hell, tells us something.  Either Francis was careless or imprecise in his remarks, was injudicious in who he will grant an interview with, or was materially misquoted.  None of these possible explanations for this episode is good and the episode lit up social media for a day or two.  If true, Francis’s position may represent a major concession to Jean-Paul Satre (“Hell is other people.”).

The hubbub over this is…..well….positively Trumpian and echoes of Trump’s comment about “shithole countries” last month.   It's almost karma that Pope Francis would step into a very Trump-like controversy.   Francis apparently made the reference to Hell in an interview with Eugenio Scalfari, a friend of the pontiff not always known for his fastidiousness.  But the Vatican claimed that Scalfari’s comments were a “reconstruction” but has not yet issued a direct denial.   But what gives the story some legs is that Francis has made some surprising moves—most recently he advocated a revision to the wording of the Lord’s Prayer.  Who would have thought that the Lord’s Prayer needed editing?

We heard about Stormy Daniels for weeks in the mainstream media, but the controversy over Hell seems to me to be vastly more important.   Hell is a basic concept in Christianity.  Its existence has lurked in the background and in some measure may have guided the behavior of Catholics for a couple of millenia.

If the Pope, who is infallible on matters of faith, simply erased Hell, I’m not sure how I feel about that.  In one sense it is a relief, because according the Catholic doctrine, there are a myriad of sins that may qualify you for that horrible place and eternity is a very long time.  It would be easy to trip over the rules (like missing Mass on Sunday) without going to confession and end up in eternal torment.  On the other hand, eliminating Hell would leave open a lot of questions.  Where, then, does Satan reside?   What about souls that really do belong there, like Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, and Jeffrey Dahmer?   Going forward, would eliminating Hell change behavior of people?   If Hell did not exist, doesn’t that bring us closer to atheists, who believe that your soul simply ceases to exist when you die?   Do we purge Dante from library shelves like we have been tearing down statues of Confederate generals? 

It’s hard to imagine two world leaders with such divergent views.  Unlike Ronald Reagan and Pope John Paul II, who together faced down the Soviet Union, Trump and Francis appear to be on the opposite ends of on a range of substantive and important issues: immigration, climate change, borders, the role of capitalism in modern society. 

Still, these two leaders have more in common than you might think.  Both Trump and Francis are disrupters.   They represent discontinuities and are attempting to make changes in their respective organizations that have an entrenched establishment fighting hard to resist that change.   Both, for instance,  are attempting to deal with an emerging China in their own way while Francis appears to be seeking some sort of an accommodation with the Chinese regime.  Trump appears to be taking a somewhat more confrontational approach to Chinese economic and military power.  But both realize that a relationship with China needs to be managed.    Both Trump and the pontiff have also taken a bolder stance in matters of foreign affairs.  Francis has not hesitated to leap into political matters.   Trump has also moved aggressively on several fronts:  Making a visionary speech in the Middle East last summer, recognizing Israel’s capital as Jerusalem, agreeing to meet with Kim Jung-Un, and taking concrete action against Chinese trade practices and intellectual property theft and coercion.  

I look forward to reading Ross Douthat’s new book, To Change the Church:  Pope Francis and the Future of Catholicism.    Regardless of Douthat’s assessment, I believe that Francis has more in common with Trump than either would admit.   Neither man is a caretaker leader.  Both have a higher toleration for risk taking than their immediate predecessors, and the organizations that they lead will look much different at the end of their tenure as a result.  Both are out to reshuffle the existing order and are willing to buck the establishment.

Pope Francis apparent challenge to the existence of Hell and Trump tweeting out to Kim Jung-Un, “Why would Kim Jung-Un call me “old” when I would NEVER call him “short and fat?”  Oh well, I try so hard to be his friend- and maybe someday that will happen!”  and then agreeing to meet with him without conditions tells you that both men are committed to a break with the past. Neither is a guardian of the status quo.  Like them or not, they are the new disrupters.