Supremacy among Americans on Earth has devolved to Trump and Pope Leo, who preside over disparate spheres of influence.

The newly elected American world leader's motto, a forceful "Fight!", starkly contrasts with the pontiff's inaugural public utterance upon assuming the papacy: a resonant "Peace."

The dissimilarity between President Donald Trump and Chicago-born Pope Leo XIV is of the utmost acerbity, politically, personally, and ideologically; their respective leadership roles and domains are profoundly divergent.

Nonetheless, Leo’s unprecedented ascendance last week to the pontificate, presiding over 1.4 billion Catholics as the inaugural U.S.-born Pope, signifies that the two preeminent figures globally are now Americans, thereby engendering inquiries concerning the amplification of American hegemony at a juncture when Trump’s protectionist tariff skirmishes and his peremptory “one way or the other” ultimatums have fundamentally disrupted eight decades of established international comity and instilled a pervasive skepticism towards the United States amongst its traditional confederates.

The potential for excessive American geopolitical influence is broadly perceived as a contributing factor to the Catholic Church's historical reluctance to elect an American pontiff throughout the nation's nearly 250-year existence, until the recent elevation of former Cardinal Robert F. Prevost of Chicago, now Pope Leo XIV, to the 267th papacy.

“The inherent paradox attending Leo’s electoral triumph resides in the fact that a substantial proportion of the global populace is poised to interpret it as a harbinger of optimism – perceiving him as an American capable of articulating their concerns and aspirations, as opposed to pursuing a course detrimental to their interests,” remarked David Gibson, who directs Fordham University’s Center on Religion and Culture.

Pope Leo represents a distinct archetype of the American persona on the global stage.

The initial astonishment and euphoria surrounding the relatively obscure cardinal's elevation swiftly metamorphosed into vigorous discourse concerning the potential for two Americans to occupy the apex of the global hierarchy.

Trump's well-documented aversion to ceding the spotlight or relinquishing preeminence is unequivocally underscored by his "America First" foreign policy doctrine, a stance which resonated sufficiently with American Catholics to sway their electoral preference in his favour over his Democratic adversary, Kamala Harris.

In what appears to be a blatant sop to his constituency, Trump disseminated an AI-fabricated depiction of himself assuming the vestments of a pontiff during the period of profound grief following the demise of Pope Francis on April 21st, a manoeuvre that elicited considerable disapprobation among segments of the Catholic faithful and Italian populace, notwithstanding Trump's disavowal of personal responsibility for the image's dissemination, his assertion that those who took umbrage possessed a deficient sense of humour, and his staunch insistence on the purported universal acclaim of the imagery within Catholic circles.

Nevertheless, Trump conveyed his felicitations to Leo, deeming it a “singular distinction” that the newly elected pontiff hailed from the United States.

Pope Leo, meanwhile, is in some senses a political operator as well, possessing a placid demeanour and adopting the tactic of engaging his fellow cardinals in intimate colloquies prior to the conclave, according to reports. Although a native of Chicago, Leo — then Prevost — dedicated two decades to missionary work in Peru before his appointment by Pope Francis in 2023 to preside over the formidable Vatican dicastery responsible for vetting prospective bishops globally.

He would not stand as the inaugural pontiff to engage in global political affairs. Pope John Paul II, for instance, is justifiably lauded for his instrumental role in the dismantling of communism. However, Leo assumes the papacy having previously articulated critical commentary on social media regarding Vice President JD Vance, the most prominent Catholic figure within the American political landscape. Leo finds himself in a state of ideological divergence with the current administration on salient policy matters such as immigration—a cornerstone of Trump's agenda—and environmental stewardship.

Mirroring the strategy of Trump, Leo has ostensibly redirected his focus toward the media landscape; on Monday within the precincts of Vatican City, he vociferously advocated for the liberation of incarcerated journalists and underscored the imperative for "all of us to vigilantly safeguard the inestimable endowment of free speech and the press," an approach starkly contrasting with Trump's demonstrably confrontational stance towards journalists, which has pervaded from the echelons of the White House to the judicial arenas.

Insofar as their leadership styles are concerned, Trump and Pope Leo represent distinct and disparate paradigms.

In early February, Leo—then still Prevost—disseminated a Catholic periodical article bearing the headline, “JD Vance is demonstrably incorrect: Jesus does not mandate a hierarchical valuation of our affection for fellow human beings.”

This occurred mere days subsequent to Vance—a convert to Catholicism—having expounded upon immigration in a Fox News interview by alluding to a Christian principle postulating a hierarchical love: first, one's family, succeeded by one's neighbour, then one's community, thence one's fellow citizens, and only thereafter, the remainder of the globe, necessitating a prioritization of the latter categories.

In Italian, addressing a multitude convened upon St. Peter's Square, Leo articulated a divergent conceptualisation for both the ecclesiastical institution and interpersonal dynamics: "We are enjoined to constitute an ecclesial body that collaboratively engineers conduits of connection and perpetually maintains its embrace in a gesture of open-armed receptivity, mirrored in the very configuration of this piazza."

Vance posited the papacy transcends the ephemeral realms of contemporary politics and social media, remarking during an interview with conservative commentator Hugh Hewitt that the challenge lies in accommodating a bimillennial institution within the exigencies of 2025 American political discourse, and that the collective welfare is better served by permitting the Church to concentrate on its teleological imperative of soul salvation.

The ascendance of Trump, concurrent with that of Leo, exemplifies the intersection where "the gospel meets the culture," according to Steven Millies, director of The Bernardin Center at Catholic Theological Union in Chicago, who further posits that religion and politics are fundamentally misaligned due to their divergent teleological orientations.

"Both Francis and the then Cardinal Prevost were engaged in their episcopal vocation — disseminating the Gospel and reiterating its perpetual alignment with the plight of the impoverished, the burdened, and the beleaguered," Millies articulated via email. "This constitutes a domain unequivocally outside Trump's purview, whether as president, reality television personality, or entrepreneur."

To what extent, in fact, can Pope Leo's Weltanschauung be deemed intrinsically American?

Leo's decadal tenure in Peru, holding dual nationality, is posited by cognoscenti to furnish him with an expanded purview spanning the human condition and the exercise of power, alongside the interwoven realms of faith and governance.

Beyond the palpable divergence in temperament from Trump, Leo is anticipated to exercise authority with a distinct methodology – prioritising aid to the most necessitous individuals, a stark contrast to Trump’s policy of curtailing American assistance. Leo's inaugural address conspicuously omitted any reference to his American lineage and was not delivered in English – a manoeuvre construed by some Vatican observers as indicative of his overarching globalcentric agenda.

Despite the veridicality of Leo's status as the inaugural U.S.-born pontiff, a more apposite perspective posits him as the second pope hailing from the Americas, a framing that fundamentally subverts insular 'America first' paradigms and fosters a more holistic conceptualization of the region, echoing Pope Francis's pioneering vision and acknowledging its pivotal gravitational locus within the global south," stated Raul Zegarra, an assistant professor of Roman Catholic theological studies at Harvard Divinity School.

"This constellation of factors suggests a pontiff who apprehends global stewardship via colloquy rather than sequestration; who perceives authority through ministration, not subjugation," he averred. "It is arduous to envision a more pronounced divergence from the contemporary administration in the U.S."

According to sundry American cardinals, Leo is demonstrably not an exemplar of American style or perspective, his U.S. provenance having exerted scant, if any, discernible influence on his papal elevation; nevertheless, the specter of Trump loomed throughout the deliberations.

Upon the heels of the conclave, a sextet of American cardinals ascended the dais at a press conference, soundtracked by the anthemic strains of "Born in the USA" and "American Pie" emanating from the speakers, whereupon, in sequential fashion, each proceeded to attenuate the significance of Leo’s American origins, with one cardinal citing a circulating aphorism characterizing Leo as “the least American of the American” cardinals, and several others articulating the expectation of Leo functioning as a “bridge-builder” with the Trump administration, thus embodying the very etymology of the Latin term “pontiff.”

Interrogated as to whether the cardinals had elected Leo to counterbalance Trump, sundry affirmed in the negative.

Cardinal Timothy Dolan, the Archbishop of New York, posited that his fellow cardinals would not have conceived of him as a counterpoise to any particular individual.

"Evidently, the cardinals were acutely apprised of events transpiring in the United States, pronouncements uttered, and political manoeuvres undertaken," remarked Wilton Gregory, the archbishop emeritus of Washington. However, the conclave's imperative, he asserted, was the discernment of "which among our ranks" possessed the capacity to buttress the faith.

Millies averred: “The world should not apprehend a pontiff of U.S. provenance; contrarily, as ‘the least American of Americans,’ his disengagement from our recent political currents renders him seemingly more innocuous, even as his intimate familiarity with this nation’s more salutary inclinations persists.”

The invaluable insights furnished by Darlene Superville, an Associated Press correspondent operating out of Washington, were pivotal in the genesis of this report.