Transcript
Discussion (0)
Good morning and welcome to Morning Joe.
It's Monday, April 21st.
We come on the air with breaking news.
Pope Francis has passed away.
The Vatican made the announcement early this morning saying the 88-year-old Bishop of Rome
returned to the house of the Father.
Just yesterday, Francis made a surprise public appearance to bless thousands of people in
St. Peter's Square.
He then drove through the Piazza, the Pope Mobile.
The Pope had been recovering from pneumonia.
He was in the hospital for five weeks and was discharged less than a month ago.
MSNBC's Chris Jansing has a look back at his life and legacy.
Francis, the pastor,
gathering excited children on the Pope Mobile.
Ever the warm and humble priest he showed the world
the day he was elected in 2013.
Asking for prayers, dressed in a simple white cassock
and an iron cross, not the traditional
gold.
No surprise from a man who was Cardinal in Buenos Aires, lived in a small apartment,
rode the subway and cooked his own meals.
He could understand regular people.
I'm an ordinary person, an ordinary guy with an extraordinary job.
And I think that the message was, I am one of you.
But then surprising many as pope by bluntly taking on controversial causes,
speaking out against the invasion of Ukraine.
Criticizing those who wouldn't wear masks during the pandemic,
calling couples who had pets instead of children selfish,
and as the first pope to address a joint session of Congress,
challenging the U.S. to open its arms to refugees and abolish the death penalty.
Even earlier, just months after his election, saying something revolutionary
for a Catholic church leader, that the church must welcome the LGBTQ community.
If a person is gay and seeks God and has goodwill, who am I to judge?
It's the pope saying something that no other pope has said, not only in terms of the implications
of that statement, but the very willingness to speak with such kind of spontaneity and
ease on a grave matter to reporters at the back
of a plane.
By that December, Time Magazine and The Advocate named Francis their Person of the Year.
He made the cover of Rolling Stone, Fortune's List of the most powerful people in the world,
and he was the first as Pontiff to have an Instagram account, gaining a million followers
in the first 12 hours.
He was born Jorge Mario Bergoglio in Buenos Aires, Argentina, the eldest of five children of Italian immigrants, as a young man holding jobs as a bouncer, a janitor, and studying chemistry
before entering the seminary. When Pope Benedict retired, Bergoglio was seen as a cardinal whose time had passed,
and at 76, too old.
But after five ballots, white smoke.
The first Jesuit ever elected pope, the first from Latin America, and the first in nearly
six hundred years to follow a retirement.
A story so dramatic, Hollywood couldn't resist.
You have lifted a great burden from my shoulders.
You placed in everyone of mine.
Francis took over a church with 1.3 billion members deeply divided over
abortion, divorce, the ordination of women and married priests.
He came into the church at a time in which there was tremendous tremendous crisis, both internally and externally in terms of its reputation,
and he in a sense rebranded the Catholic Church.
At a time when the church really needed a facelift, he provided it.
He expanded roles for women in parishes and at the Vatican,
but didn't budge on making them priests,
considered allowing married priests in remote areas,
but ultimately didn't, and reaffirmed many times,
church teaching against abortion.
Conservative Catholics argue Francis prioritized
pastoral openness and outreach
at the expense of church doctrine.
Since our main work in the church is preparing people
and calling people to heaven,
we need to be able to tell them,
no, that's sinful conduct that will get you barred
from going in the door.
Other critics question whether his moves
to toughen church laws dealing with sexual abuse
by priests went far enough.
["Cantarellum inum"]
But with his appointment of 21 new and diverse cardinals
in 2022, Francis further shaped
a church leadership tilting more toward the developing world and one that's more inclusive,
willing to at least talk about tough issues.
Pope Francis understood that this was a world experiencing a lot of hurt and that hurt was
of such a magnitude that it needs a divine healing.
When failing health led to rumors of retirement, the pope who once ministered to the poor in
the slums of Buenos Aires said simply, leave a legacy of good, not just goods, as he had
done himself, washing the feet of prison inmates, embracing the sick, and shining a light on
the Catholic mission of love and mercy.
Wow, we have so much to talk about here in terms of the legacy of Pope Francis, Richard Hoth,
Jonathan Lemire, Joe and me starting off the show and we're lining up guests as this breaking
news unfolds before our eyes. And Joe, Pope Francis, the things that stand out to me was first
just living by example, the simplicity of his life, even when he could have the
comforts around him of anything of his choosing. He chose to live so simply with
a focus on the humanity of all people, even and especially the poor. Also his
focus on inclusivity, his outreach to
marginalized communities, those words, who am I to judge, will echo throughout
his legacy. Go ahead. Oh yeah, and I was just gonna say and many on the hard
right inside the church were shocked that this pope would actually borrow from Jesus Christ and
living that simple life.
Borrow from Jesus Christ.
And they were radical words when he said it.
And it was like, it sounded like the shot of a cannon.
It just stunned everybody when the pope said, Who am I to judge? Now,
why in the world would he say something that radical? I don't know. Maybe it's because
that's exactly what Jesus said to the woman at the well when religious leaders were going
to stone her to death. And Jesus said, as they dropped their rocks after saying, let he who is without sin cast the first stone,
Jesus turned and said, where are your accusers now?
Well, I also don't accuse you, go and sin no more.
And that's the thing, Mika, his legacy was remarkable
in that Jesus reached out to those who were shunned by religious leaders in society,
the lepers, the tax collectors, the sinners like the woman at the well. And with Francis,
conservatives, many conservatives inside the church hated him for being Christ-like in that respect.
Just as the religious leaders of his day hated Jesus,
but Francis was unbowed and being inclusive
while following the word of the gospels.
Many on the left were also disappointed,
as we heard in Chris's package,
that often his words would not lead
to changing church doctrine.
But even that approach mirro. Jesus, who did save
the woman at the well, said he held no judgment toward her and then said, go and sin no more.
Pope Francis understood the importance of opening wide the doors of the church to everybody,
to those who were judged,
to those that Jesus opened his faith to.
And it really was, Mika,
it really was really radical
for the time in which he lived.
And now the big question is moving forward,
which direction does this church go back to?
Does it go back to a legacy of doctrine and law
over love and inclusivity?
We will see how much of an impact Francis really did have
on the long-term shape and
direction of this church.
Well, we're getting international reaction to Pope Francis' passing.
French President Emmanuel Macron said that he and his wife send their thoughts to all
Catholics and to the grieving world.
Israeli President Isaac Herzog stated that Francis was a man of deep
faith and boundless compassion. He has dedicated his life to uplifting the poor and calling
for peace in a troubled world. May his memory continue to inspire acts of kindness, unity
and hope. President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen tweeted, May they find solace in the idea that Pope Francis's legacy will continue
to guide us toward a more just, peaceful, and compassionate world. And King Charles
wrote, my wife and I were most deeply saddened to learn of the death of
Pope Francis through his hard work and care for both people and planet.
He profoundly touched the lives of many. And here at home, Vice President J.D.
Vance, who just met with the Pope over the weekend, posted that he was happy to see him
yesterday and that may God rest his soul. With the Pope's passing, here's a look at what comes next.
Cardinals will decide the date and the funeral
of the Pope's burial. Typically, the funeral is held four to six days after the death in
St. Peter's Square. Francis had said that unlike many predecessors, he would not be laid to
rest in the crypt of St. Peter's Basilica, but in Rome's St. Mary Major Basilica.
He also asked to be buried in a simple wooden casket.
The conclave to elect a new pope starts in the Vatican Sistine Chapel between 15 and
20 days after the death.
The cardinals who are confined to the Vatican for the duration of the conclave decide the
exact day.
There are currently 252 Catholic cardinals, 138 of whom are eligible to vote for the new
pope.
The others are over the age of 80, which means they cannot take part in the election, although
they can join in the debate over who should be selected. The Cardinals need a majority of at least two thirds
plus one to elect the new Pope,
so the voting can take several rounds
spread over numerous days.
And Joe, the process, of course,
really laid out in terms of the high emotion and the high drama of it in this
latest movie, The Conclave. Right, and what you're likely to see again in
those that are going to be voting for the next pope, deciding who the next
pope is going to be, a more diverse group that are going, cardinals that are going
to be making that decision for two reasons.
One, because the church is growing much faster in the south than it is across the west, but also
because it was Pope Francis who selected many new cardinals from there. With us, let's bring in by phone Bishop Robert Barron
of the Diocese of Winona Rochester in Minnesota. He's also the founder of Word on Fire,
a non-profit Catholic media organization. Thank you so much for being with us. I'm curious,
your thoughts this morning on, of course, the legacy of Pope Francis, your thoughts on him as a
man and where the church you love so much goes next.
Yeah, good morning to everybody.
Yeah, I was awakened very early with the news of the Pope's passing.
And, you know, my first move was to come to my chapel and to pray for him.
And then I just remembered, you know, the Popes of my lifetime, he's the one I knew best personally. I was like the Synod the
last two Octobers, you know, with him. I've met him on a number of occasions, and
he was a very good man, and I enjoyed, you know, the brief conversations we had.
And so I felt a personal loss, and I think all Catholics, when the Pope dies,
it's your father's diet. And, you know, we
call him Holy Father, we pray for him every single day. So that's my first reaction, just
kind of a personal sense of loss of a spiritual father. You know, his legacy has been a rich
one. And as many have been commenting, a poor church on behalf of the poor is one of his slogans,
and he lived it.
He didn't just talk about it, he lived it.
And all those gestures of simplicity.
One of my enduring memories is 2015 when he came to the United States.
I was there and all the US bishops were gathered on the steps of St. Matthew's Cathedral,
and all these limousines are pulling up, you know, with world leaders and presidents and so on. And then it was almost comical, and this little teeny
tiny car comes up, and the Pope got out of it. But that was Francis, you know,
he lived that, the journey to the margins. I think that was it. And to me,
born very much of his Jesuit formation, he had to fight in this deep way, you
know, emotionally as
well as intellectually with the Lord, and that meant, you know, to reach out to
those who've been forgotten and marginalized and bring them to the
center. I think that was the instinct of Francis time and time again. It was the
interpretive key to his papacy. And as you say, even the way he chose cardinals,
choosing them from all over the world in places
that normally would never have a cardinal, I remember the conclave running into this
young Italian man, but he was serving in Mongolia.
And the pope named him Cardinal of Mongolia, even though there's like, I think, 5,000 Catholics
in the entire country.
But that was typical of him.
You know, he wanted to internationalize, of course, the
College of Cardinals, but to include people who would never have had a Cardinalaceal seat.
Now that will have a very interesting implication, as you suggested, for the conclave, because
a lot of these men don't have a lot of experience with Rome, and they don't know each other
that well. I think that's a real change this time, precisely because of the way Francis chose the Cardinals.
So we'll see how that will play out when the conclave takes place.
So Bishop, if there were those that are not Christians, don't follow the faith closely,
not Catholics, They might just read
headlines and news stories. We have read news stories over the past several
years about Francis saying things that upset those in the church, but
things that seem to make basic sense for a religious leader. Talk about how Pope Francis in reaching out to the poor, reaching out to the
destitute, reaching out to migrants, reaching out to those who were shunned by the church,
so closely parallels throughout the New Testament, throughout the Gospels, what Jesus Christ did,
whether it was telling Zacchaeus
to come down from the tree, whether it was what he did with the woman at the well, whether
it was telling people when they mocked and ridiculed Jesus for who he was having dinner
with.
Talk about how France is much or more than any pope of our lifetime actually followed
that lesson of Jesus, the importance of being inclusive,
while not adopting an I'm okay, you're okay approach, while also staying tough,
again, just like Jesus at the well said, well, I don't judge you either, now go and sin no more.
Right, and that combination is very important.
Because to your first point, he was formed in this Jesuit tradition, which encourages people to
really move into the scene. If you're looking at a biblical story to feel how people felt
to identify with that moment. So like the woman at the well or likes the key answer the man born blind And I think he was so shaped by that that it shaped his thinking and his his behavior and right
Jesus open table fellowship saints and sinners welcome the insiders and the outsiders a special
Affection for the tax collectors the prostitutes. I mean all of that
I think he deeply felt but as you're also correctly saying and we can sort of caricature Francis as just, you know, I'm
Mr. Friendly and anything goes, by no means. I mean, he was a very strong opponent of abortion.
He was against homosexual acts, even as he reached out with great generosity toward gay
people. He didn't change the Church's moral teaching
in any way.
I think what he embodied was this great attitude of outreach, of inclusivity, of invitation,
of the offer of mercy.
Now, there is maybe a key term to understand him, mercy.
Misericordia, he loved that word.
Well, the mercy of Jesus is just that, to go out to those.
But part of mercy is to say, well, now sin no more.
Now find the right path.
So he did both of those things, and that was all, you're quite right, in deep imitation
of Jesus.
And, you know, Mika, that is, as there are those that are grappling with his legacy,
you will hear most likely criticism
from people on the far right and some criticism on the left who wanted him to change 2,000
years of doctrine instead of taking a more incremental approach, instead of taking a
more inclusive approach.
Like so many great leaders, you will have people on both sides
saying, well, he didn't go enough in our direction or he didn't go enough in the
other direction. But for Francis, again, even saying something like, who am I to
judge? Very radical at the time, but very consistent with the
teachings of Jesus Christ over the past 2,000 years. Well, radical at the time, but very consistent with the teachings of Jesus Christ
over the past 2,000 years.
Well, he lived the example of Jesus, and with that he was able to have that outreach to
marginalized communities, to people who felt left out, to people who were down and out,
to people who were not included in society.
And he was able to do that within the teachings, as you said, Joe, of Jesus.
And John Lomir, he also was able to make some very strong messages about world events.
I'm thinking particularly Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
Yeah, so many Catholics, myself included, were so grateful that he
made one last Easter. He had been sick for so long and now I think in
some ways that a fitting time of his passing here on Easter Monday. But in his
final Republican remarks yesterday, he spoke about the need for ceasefire in
Gaza. He has repeatedly talked about the need to bring an end to the war in
Ukraine and condemned Russia's invasion there. And certainly, as so well said, the Pope,
a real man of the people, he stayed in touch
with who he was, he still rooted for his boyhood soccer team
from Argentina, he was heartened when Argentina won
the World Cup just a couple of years ago.
And those gestures of, I remember when he visited New York
in 2015 and the FDR was shut for the Papal motorcade,
and it was the longest motorcade I've ever seen.
And I've covered presidents and other world leaders.
And yet his vehicle was just this little fiat in the middle of this tiny little car.
And he was leaning out the window and waving to everyone who had gathered alongside.
You know, and even as his health started to decline the last couple of years, he still
would go to the prison and wash feet, other traditions there, and as he moved the church in a more inclusive tone and rhetoric,
to be sure. And I'm also remembering today his haunting prayers during the first days of the
COVID pandemic, which of course hit Italy so hard there in March of 2020, preaching to an empty
in March of 2020 preaching to a empty St. Peter's Square, Mika. But you're right. He was both a
man of the people, but also a statesman on issues like world peace, climate change, and the like. And that will be, Richard, a big part of his legacy.
It will be. But the sadness of the time, I thought, Jonathan, was in some ways he was a man slightly out
of touch with the times.
He was a man of peace at a time of great violence in the Middle East, in Europe, which he was
not in a position to stop.
He was a man of simplicity and modesty at a time of extraordinary wealth and economic
inequality.
He was a man of inclusiveness, one of the most dominant political issue in
a lot of the West was opposition to immigration. So I think to me as a non-Catholic watching
him, there was a decency about the man, a gentleness about the man. But in some ways
I was struck by the contrast between him and his times. He didn't waver. He was who he was. But in many cases, I thought
his ability to influence his times, this is not a criticism, just an observation, he seemed
to almost represent the kind of almost niceness and a decency for times which had an edge
and a harshness to them.
Well, moments ago, as we mentioned, Ukraine here, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and a decency for times which had an edge and a harshness to them.
Well moments ago, as we mentioned Ukraine here, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky
just posted this.
Millions of people around the world are mourning the tragic news of Pope Francis' passing.
His life was devoted to God, to people, and to the Church.
He knew how to give hope, ease suffering through prayer, and foster unity.
He prayed for peace in Ukraine and for Ukrainians.
We grieve together with Catholics and all Christians who look to the Pope Francis for
spiritual support, eternal memory. Let's bring in NBC News Chief International Correspondent, Keir Simmons, live from Dubai.
Keir, tell us more about reaction from around the world.
Well, the reaction is unanimous.
And you read then the statement from President Zelensky of Ukraine, Mika, this was a pope of, as you've been saying,
of mercy and compassion, but also of enormous sacrifice. That message of peace for Ukraine
and Gaza, that message he sent just yesterday, so hours before his passing. And I was thinking,
Mika, about being there at the Vatican in 2013, when he
was chosen for the Papacy, and how we marveled at the way that he immediately rejected the
kind of trinkets and bauble and instead made it clear through his actions that he was a
man of the people. And incredible, isn't it, that even right until the final hours,
he was doing the same thing.
So once again, appearing in St. Peter's Square and again,
sending that message to Ukraine and to Gaza,
even while he could not know, we did not know,
that that was his final day of work.
His final hours were spent giving to people and trying to send the message that he has
been trying to send through his entire papacy.
And it hasn't been easy.
The controversy has been there.
And not simply in the ways you might suspect.
So controversy from Ukraine, for example, when he had a Russian woman and a Ukrainian
woman carry the cross together early on, close to the time of Russia's full-scale invasion
of Ukraine, that caused a good deal of backlash in Ukraine because inevitably the motions
are so high. But what the Pope did then and did and has continued to do
was to try to hold out that message of compassion for everyone, for all, no matter what side you're
on. And that really is the role of a Pope, you know, a modern Pope, you would think. As you
mentioned, the question now, who will take his place? The conclave hasn't been
announced even yet. You know, we have to have the plans for the funeral, all of those things.
And there will be some back and forth, some pressure within the politics of the Catholic
Church over what kind of pope should come next, as Joe was mentioning, and whether it should be
someone to follow the traditions of Pope Francis or to take the church in a different direction.
But there will be many, many who will be hoping that his legacy is not just a legacy but continues.
And many from different places, the King of England, King Charles, for example, meeting
with the Pope just in recent weeks. Again, very close to his
past. And you mentioned the Vice President, JD Rance, meeting with the Pope just in recent days.
Again, what an example by a man who gave his life to the Church and the last more than a
decade of his life to the papacy.
All right, NBC's Keir Simmons, thank you so much.
Greatly appreciate that. You know, I was hearing Richard so right that this pope seemed to be at times a man out of time,
so separated from the events of the world. I actually, Bishop,
think that's actually a beautiful legacy for him. In a time of war, he offered
peace. In a time of hate, he offered love. It reminded me of Martin Luther King's
famous quote that darkness cannot drive out darkness,
only light can do that. And hate cannot drive out hate, only love can do that. And how extraordinary
that the Pope and Vatican City stood apart from the world in that respect.
Right. And that's an important point to, that the Pope, you know, is standing
for the Lord Jesus and standing for this great gospel truth. And the culture sometimes is
for that, sometimes is against it. It's like the waves breaking against the rock, and the
church has to stand for the Lord. And sometimes it will get applause for that, sometimes it
will get brickbats for that, and that's the way it goes. I'm glad you mentioned
King. Remember when the Pope was in America and he cited the four great Americans, and one of them
was Martin Luther King, and I think he was very much in King's spirit that the Gospel, when properly
presented, does have a world-changing impact. That's very much his perspective. I think he,
like all the great Popes, stood for the
Lord Jesus Christ in the midst of this ever-changing and ambiguous culture. But he had that serene
confidence in the Lord and serene confidence in the power of the gospel.
Bishop Robert Barron, thank you so much for joining us early this morning on this breaking
news. And still ahead on Morning Joe, we'll continue to follow the breaking news throughout the
morning, including a look at how Pope Francis used his voice to intervene in multiple global
conflicts.
We're also following the reported turmoil at the Pentagon, where Defense Secretary
Pete Hegsath is once again facing controversy over information he reportedly
shared in a private signal chat.
This time the group included his wife and brother.
We'll get to that next on Morning Joe.
We are back in 90 seconds.
We continue to follow the breaking news that are the Vatican this morning.
Pope Francis, the first Latin American pontiff in history, has passed away at the age of
88.
We're all waking up to this very sad news this morning.
As the leader of the Catholic Church, Pope Francis has used his voice to intervene in multiple global conflicts.
NBC's Anne Thompson brings us his legacy of diplomacy.
Diplomacy, as practiced by popes, is a uniquely personal endeavor.
And Pope Francis made his story, a pontiff from, as he called it, the end of the earth,
the cornerstone of Vatican foreign policy.
Nowhere was this more apparent than the issue of migration, a topic he addressed in multiple
countries.
In 2016, he traveled to Ciudad Juarez, on the U.S.-Mexico border to call for compassion and aid,
praying for asylum seekers who died just yards from the United States.
Saying those who sought to build only walls and not bridges were not Christian.
He has this in his gut. He is a product of immigration,
his Italian forebears having gone to Argentina because they were poor.
They didn't have enough to eat.
It's as simple as that.
So he has immigration in his blood, in his DNA.
What was his greatest asset on the world stage?
I think sincerity.
He said what he felt and what he believed
without taking too much consideration
into the repercussions that it may or may not have
on the political scare, on the political scene.
Francis also focused his attention on conflicts and issues
the world often preferred to ignore,
becoming the first Pope to travel to an active combat zone,
the Central African Republic's brutal civil war.
Francis did not shy away from the dramatic gesture.
At a meeting of rival South Sudanese leaders,
he kissed their feet,
imploring them to respect their ceasefire agreement.
Reaching across religious divisions was a priority
in the later years of Francis' papacy.
Meeting in 2021 in Iraq with Shiite leader Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani.
While visiting the city of Ur, the birthplace of the prophet Abraham, he forcefully denounced
extremism.
We believers cannot be silent when terrorism abuses religion, he said.
No conflicts seem beyond help for Francis, not even that between Israel and Palestine.
In 2014, visiting the separation wall, a symbol of Israeli oppression to the Palestinians.
Later inviting then-Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas to the
Vatican to pray together.
The October 7 terror attacks by Hamas against Israel and the resulting war in Gaza saw the
Pope again trying to play a meaningful role to end the conflict.
Meeting with families of Israelis held hostage by Hamas and those of Palestinians killed in the bombing.
It's a balancing act for Pope Francis.
It is, but nobody wants any innocent civilians killed,
whether they're Palestinian or whether they're Israeli.
Pope Francis is about the faith of life and trying to help everyone.
But that balancing act came with a price.
After Russia invaded Ukraine,
Francis was dogged by accusations
that he failed to sufficiently condemn
Russia's actions in general,
and Vladimir Putin in particular,
despite meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky
and referring to Ukraine as a martyred nation.
He's not a diplomat.
He's a moral authority.
And those two things, the diplomacy and the moral authority, can sometimes get him in
trouble.
And in China, a 2018 agreement to allow the Chinese Communist Party to have a say in who
can be appointed bishop for the country's beleaguered Catholic minority was deeply unpopular.
It seems to have been one of abandoning faithful Catholics in China in order to make deals
with the People's Republic of China.
Pope Francis sought to hold the Vatican out as a place to negotiate peace. But like many who tried, he too found peace
to be confoundingly elusive.
Confoundingly elusive and Jonathan Lemire also
doing things that, again, may have been
disappointing to some followers in his church,
but whether it was going to China,
whether it was, you know, whatever he was doing where he didn't get the
immediate results that people had expected or even seeming to compromise
reminds me so much of when I was younger Billy Graham going to the Soviet Union
and going to the Soviet Union for several reasons.
First of all, understanding there were souls there to be reached, but also hoping to have
Christians treated more humanely there.
It's something that we saw Pope Francis do time and time again when he would go to countries
and speak out against terrorism,
he would always talk about the protection
of the Christian minorities in those countries
and the need to protect them.
Same with China.
Yeah, that was a through line throughout his world travels,
of which there were many.
He was a real globetrotting pontiff up until the very end,
of course, when his health started
to slip.
But he would talk about those Christian minorities.
He would just talk about the need for peace and protecting children and migrants is an
issue as we talked earlier in the show.
In fact, his first trip outside of Rome was to an island off the coast of Italy that had
seen a lot of migrants come there.
He talked about the importance of offering them protection. He once flew to Greece in 2016 and brought back with him 12 Syrian migrants aboard his
the Papal plane back to Rome.
This is, you know, he is someone who was migrant, migrants, it was climate change, it was the
need for peace.
These were his global thoughts, his foreign policy, if you will, though of course
as just noted, more of a moral leader than a diplomat, Richard Haass. And certainly,
and then that's how he approached the church as well, where yes, there were some progressive
Catholics who wish he would have gone even further on certain things, but 2,000 years
of tradition in history and doctrine. And he did indeed move the church in terms of inclusivity,
in terms of rhetoric with LGBTQ plus communities
and the like.
It is gonna be a remarkable legacy here.
A total shift from his predecessor, Pope Benedict.
That is clear.
What's interesting to me is when I look at him,
is I see him not just as a moral authority
and someone who does wanna influence the world,
but also as the leader of an institution.
And that's what you're getting at.
And the question is what comes next.
His legacy so much depend upon successors.
It's the chance to lock them in to continue.
He made his appointments, for example, for cardinals.
And then his successor will make dozens of more appointments for cardinals.
And that'll influence the trajectory and the politics.
Because at the end of the day, the church is also a political institution, which has
all sorts of trade-offs to be made in terms of policies, in terms of directions, and so
forth.
So it's almost, you know, everyone's going to be spending the next few days, for obvious
reasons, talking about the man, talking about the legacy.
But sometimes the legacy is up for grabs.
I actually think whenever you're succeeded, so much depends upon the choice, whether that
person decides to continue or reverse.
Yeah, and Mika, certainly Vatican watchers have long speculated what could come next,
whether it's the same sort of more progressive mode or perhaps more reaction back to the
center.
Absolutely.
Yeah, no doubt about it, Mika.
And we're going to be hearing over the next couple of days as people talk about his legacy,
going to hear about his championing of migrants.
And there will obviously be many on the right who will be critical of that.
I will say again, just like so many other things we've talked about this morning, his
view on migrants was anchored deep in the Gospels.
And again, just for those who don't know, so when you hear the debates in the coming
days, you can understand where Francis was anchored on this issue. It wasn't some Marxist
teaching from his early days.
It was Jesus Christ. Jesus was asked, Who is my neighbor?
And that's when Jesus told the parable of the good Samaritan.
A man was beaten on a road. You had priests walk past doing nothing.
You had others walking past doing nothing. But it was a Samaritan, a foreigner, a man that that should have been loathed
and should have loathed the man who was beaten up.
It was that Samaritan who stopped to take care of the man,
put him up, give the innkeeper money
to nurse him back to health.
And Jesus said, that man, that foreigner, that despised Samaritan, that is your neighbor.
And so, so I mean, I suppose there'll be some who, I mean, maybe they're offended by the teachings
of Jesus Christ. So maybe they'll want to attack Francis for taking that same view as Jesus Christ. But again, so many of these things
that the hard right inside the church have suggested
is left-wing Marxist liberation ideology.
No, it's actually, it's the teachings of Jesus Christ
over 2,000 years old.
And if you're just joining us,
we're covering the breaking news of Pope Francis' passing.
Pope Francis has died at the age of 88.
And Joe, to your point, even in death, the pope following the teachings of Jesus will
take a look at his choices for how he wants to be laid to rest, for his funeral proceedings,
where he chooses to be laid to rest for his funeral proceedings, where he chooses to be laid to rest,
and of course, what comes next in the process of choosing
a new pope as we take in this news very fresh,
early this morning of the passing of Pope Francis
just hours after Easter Sunday.
In other news this morning,
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth reportedly used his personal
phone to disclose information about U.S. military operations in Yemen.
This is a different group chat situation.
This is another signal group chat where he shared sensitive information to sources with
knowledge of the matter.
Tell NBC News 13 people were in the chat, including Hegseth's wife and brother.
The sources say Hegseth sent the messages after an aide warned him
to not share sensitive information on Signal.
OK, this comes a month after the editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, Jeffrey Goldberg, revealed
the Trump administration accidentally added him to a Signal group chat about Yemen attack
plans.
National Security Adviser Mike Walz has taken responsibility for creating that message chain.
According to The New York Times, the other group chat was started by Hegseth.
The secretary shared essentially the same information in both groups, including the
flight schedules for the military jets that targeted the Houthis. The information was
reportedly sent to both chats at roughly the same time. What's going on here?
Four people familiar with the chat tell the New York Times
that Hegseth's chat was named Defense Team Huddle,
and it did not include any other cabinet-level officials.
It was initially created as a forum
for discussing routine administrative
or scheduling information.
Sources tell the paper Hegseth did not usually discuss sensitive military operations.
Hegseth's chat included his wife, who is a former Fox News producer and not a Defense
Department employee.
His brother and personal lawyer were also in the chat.
They both have jobs in the Pentagon, but it's not known why they would need to
know anything about attack plans in Yemen. In a statement, the chief Pentagon
spokesperson denied any classified information was shared in either of the
signal chats. Let's bring in one of the reporters of that piece,
New York Times reporter, Greg Jaffe.
Also with us, retired U.S. Army Lieutenant,
General Mark Hurtling.
His military career spans more than three decades
of service, including as the commanding general
of the U.S. Army Europe and the 7th Army.
So we'll get to that in a moment. But first Mr. Jaffe, more on your reporting.
I almost felt like we were reporting on the first signal scandal. It seems so
similar. Tell us more about who he included in this chat and why perhaps this is the same thing happening all over again?
Or worse?
Yeah, so the chat, as you—yeah, the chat, as you noted, included his wife, his brother,
his personal attorney, and most of his inner circle, which has been in a pretty—has been
in a state of tumult these last couple of weeks.
And I think it's worth noting it's a very inexperienced inner circle
and he's a very inexperienced secretary.
So it's a group of people who hadn't been used
to operating at this level of government.
And I think that's the other kind of key point here.
He doesn't have a lot of experience at senior officials
and he's surrounding himself with people
who also kind of lack experience.
You know, General, I was just a little congressman, one of 435.
So in the armed services committee, we would get information.
And we understood we didn't tell a soul.
It didn't tell a soul.
Nobody.
Not even staff members. Not members, certainly not family members.
I'm just curious, you've operated actually on such a higher level where the lives of
our men and women in uniform were at risk if information got out.
I just, I mean, even on my small level,
this is just really, this is so hard to comprehend.
I wonder how shocking it must be for you
who understands this sort of recklessness
could lead to lost American lives.
It is pretty shocking, Joe.
What I'll say to you, yes, I've been given information
from confidential all the way up to top secret
code word.
And the rules are when individuals are given access to national security information, intelligence,
there are two ironclad standards.
You protect classified, critical, and sensitive information, and you only share it with those
who have a clearance and with a legitimate need to know.
And you certainly don't share it with your wife, your family members, or those you're
trying to impress.
Doing anything else betrays trust and it violates the standards that all military personnel
and most government officials learn.
When someone with access to sensitive information passes it to a
favored journalist, a friendly voice in the media, a spouse or a family member,
someone without clearance, without a key role in the operations, and without a
need to know, that's not patriotism. That's performance politics. It's reckless and
it's dangerous. It risks operations. It endangers lives and it weakens US
credibility around
the world.
It also sends the key message that keeping our nation secure is optional.
And the people that are doing this truly, fully don't understand what our enemies can
collect from a resource like a signals app on a private phone.
It's just amazing to me. It's infuriating.
And I think most people who have clearances understand the same thing.
Well, in general here, we're starting with the semantics game again with the initial statements
from the DOD that this was not classified information. Have you ever known the scheduling
classified information. Have you ever known the scheduling of an operation when fighter jets are going to be taking off, when they're going to be making their strikes? Have you
ever known that in all of your years of not being the most highly classified information
that a SACDEF would hold?
Yeah, they're playing word games with this, Joe. It may not have a
classification stamp on the top that says secret or top secret or classified,
but it's critical and sensitive information. And that falls under the
category of the Department of Defense regulations, too. You don't have to have
a stamp on the top of a piece of paper to understand that anything
like this could fall into the hands of our enemies or even forces on the ground, and
they can put pieces of a puzzle together.
That's what intelligence folks do.
It's fascinating to me.
We have such tremendous people in our intelligence communities and all of the agencies, from
the military agencies all the way up to the CIA.
And it's fascinating to me that every single one of them would tell you that our enemies
can take these pieces of a puzzle, put them together, and determine things like just the
way people talk, the way they act.
When I was in Europe, or when I was in
many jobs, we used to give commanders, you know, one of my intelligence folks would give
me a black book before I went to have an engagement with a foreign dignitary or a foreign army.
It was collections on those individuals to give me a better advantage. So we can talk
about the art of the deal, but when you're talking about the art of engagement, it gives you an advantage when you have intelligence about what people
are doing, about their personal habits, about their ego and their hubris. And I got to tell
you, the information on these chats that are being shown by Jeff Goldberg and others are
just staggering. It's jaw dropping to me that anybody can say that's not important information that our
enemies can gain a lot from.
So to broaden this out a little bit, Jonathan Lemire, I know you're going to go to Greg
on his reporting, but to add to this, the Secretary of Defense's wife and brother, I
believe there's been reporting that they have been included
on some meetings as well.
So the question is, what is their role?
Yeah, there's been questions about just the-
Why?
The setup at the Pentagon surrounding Secretary of Defense
who appears to be very isolated in the building.
His wife is there, his brother is there,
other close confidants nearby at all times.
Why eyebrows raised about how his wife has been
in sort of very sensitive meetings with foreign with foreign
Governments we should note though the Pentagon put out a statement about this. We haven't heard from the Secretary of Defense himself
except a
Twitter reply to the Democrats like the political organization
He attacked them simply saying your agenda is illegals trans and DEI. That's his comment
He made a political swipe at the Democratic Party
as opposed to addressing the matter at hand.
That's all we've heard from the Secretary of Defense.
So, Greg, terrific reporting.
Tell us more also about this moment at the Pentagon
where there's been a wave of high-profile resignations,
people working with the Secretary,
one of whom wrote an op-ed for Politico last night
saying that the building is in chaos, suggesting that President Trump push out the Secretary of Defense.
We haven't heard anything from the president just yet.
But talk to us about this moment there at DOD.
Yeah, it's really unlike anything I've seen in the kind of 20 years that I've been following
the building to have the secretary's inner circle kind of turn on each other this way.
That's really, really unprecedented. And as far as I can tell, the infighting is not really over policy or
anything like that. It's just kind of, I think, who has the secretary's ear, how meetings should
be run. It's just a really, really chaotic environment. And you get the sense that there's
just a lack of process around the secretary in terms of just how to run the office on a day-to-day basis, just basic function is
not happening.
You know, this doesn't happen without a context.
You had a purge of the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, any number of other four
stars.
Now you've had this.
Mark, I was really curious.
Two things come to mind.
One is, what is morale like now?
You've got obviously civilian primacy, but you have a civilian running the Pentagon who's
violating rules that if any of the people under his command did, they would be stripped
of rank and they would be out of their jobs or worse.
So to what extent does this matter in a sense?
Do you actually think readiness is being affected by this, that recruitment's being affected
by this, discipline?
What is your sense of, because what's going on is so unprecedented and so wrong.
What do you see as the consequences?
Well, a couple of things.
First of all, it's certainly going to affect our alliances, because
when you see this kind of leakage and just a lack of responsibility and a lack of adherence
to standards on what you share or don't share with intelligence, alliances are going to
stop sharing things with us. They have already done that. In terms of the morale, I can't
comment on that because I'm not in the Pentagon,
but I have talked to others in the force who are in the operational army,
and they're shaking their head.
They're saying, you know, this is ridiculous.
Everyone should know this.
Why is this individual doing these kind of things?
And most, even the younger members of our military,
understand the implications of these
kind of things being leaked.
They are repeatedly told, don't use your personal cell phone when you're in a government building.
Don't pass information that could be sensitive on your personal cell phone.
The other thing that I'd comment that, you know, the military or the government pays a lot of money for encrypted devices and things that can pass this kind of information from
super net computers to the kinds of cell phones that are encrypted.
And even though, you know, the signals app is allegedly encrypted, I will tell you for sure, because I've seen it.
Any government in the world can break into that encryption
and find out information from it.
So people who think they're smart and say, hey, I'm just going to use signals
and it'll be encrypted and it'll disappear in a week.
That's great.
But it can still be hacked by government sources.
And then finally, we even have video teleconference
capabilities.
And you have a signal team with each one
of these important people who are carrying around
all this gear specifically so they can communicate.
So why anyone would rely on this kind of equipment
to pass sensitive information and especially pass it
to other people who might be have their
phones hacked too.
There's two sides of these kinds of communications.
The sender who could have their phone, their personal phone hacked and the receiver who
could also have their phone hacked.
And when you're talking about a lot of people in the Pentagon that have interim security
clearances, this is a completely dangerous thing.
But the finally, to answer your question, there's turmoil in the force.
Yeah, and you, General, just to end here on some of the words you said there, everyone
should know this.
Everyone does know this, given especially how widely covered the Signal Chat scandal.
The first one was retired U.S. Army Lieutenant General Mark Hurling, a reporter for The New
York Times.
Greg Jaffe, thank you both.
Thank you, Greg, for your reporting.
And Richard, I wonder what the consequences of this is, especially given that the president
himself conceded this was not OK by, I believe, saying his national security adviser had learned
a lesson, which is as close as I think as it is to conceding
that maybe this was a bad idea to be talking about sensitive plans on signal.
Like it reinforces the reality, Mika, that we have someone who's Secretary of Defense
who ought not to be Secretary of Defense.
And what General Hirtling just said, the last phrase, turmoil in the force.
This is really a corrosive thing.
But Jonathan would know better than anybody, this is a president who's reluctant to make
changes with his highest level.
And particularly someone like Pete Hegsath, who's so popular with his political base,
I, for one, would be surprised if changes that should happen will happen.
Joe.
Yeah, you know, Jonathan O'Mara, the White House certainly understood and reporting was that the president also understood that the signal, the first signal, so-called signal
gate controversy really did, you know, impact the White House.
It was seen as very negative inside the White House.
Now, this on top of the first and the idea that it wasn't because somebody accidentally
added Jeffrey Goldberg to the list, but you have the Secretary of Defense deliberately
sending just the most sensitive information about battle plans over a commercial app that
can be hacked.
I mean, my God, I am curious to see what the president and those around him think about this.
Yes, the first signal gate really was a blow. They really knocked them off stride and in beginning a bit of a losing streak for this White House,
which we've seen with the tariffs and other issues since. We'll have to see how the president responds to this. As noted, we reported it, I reported at the time, it has not changed to this point. The president with a quote,
no scalps, not my words, senior advisor's words, policy here that they don't want to force someone
out to give the media a victory. This is the White House's thinking here that President Trump
regrets in his first term how he pushed out National Security Advisor Flynn, others early on.
He wants to dig in his heels and fight.
And we should also just note that Secretary Haggiseth has, he was very popular in the
MAGA base.
The fight to get him confirmed reminded so many of the, Mika, the fight to get Justice
Kavanaugh concerned, confirmed.
He's very popular among Fox News viewers and the like.
We'll have to see what happens though when the president is asked about this today.