The Pope and Mr Trump have a common trait…

Pope Francis has now been in office for five years. People are assessing his achievements so far, dividing on predictable liberal versus conservative lines.

Here is a more interesting approach. One of the rules of leadership is that it should break the rules. This is particularly true of popes, because of the importance of symbol in religion. Jesus was a leader, but he washed the feet of his disciples to show that he was their servant. This made him a better leader than if he had told them to wash his.

Francis understands this instinctively, and is very good at demonstrating it. It is a pastoral gift, and the word “pastoral” means being a shepherd – another image that Jesus used. The shepherd knows and loves his flock, so they know and love him. Hence Francis’s readiness to marry a couple on a plane, baptise someone without preliminaries, or say: “If a gay person seeks God, who am I to judge?” Hence, too, his tendency to plunge into a crowd.

This is a nightmare for the permanent staff of the Roman Catholic Church – not only for his security guards, but also for his bureaucrats, rule-keepers and theologians, all of whom understandably want caution and consistency.

The nearest secular equivalent of Pope Francis in the Western world is a man whom he has publicly attacked – Donald Trump. Both men defy the rules and are happy to annoy important people. Both act in a way that seems capricious, sometimes egocentric. Both get their startling messages across. Neither is captured by a machine.

Obviously there are differences. Francis tries hard to be a personally good man; no one would accuse Mr Trump of that. But the similarity is there. Both men noisily proclaim their creed. For Mr Trump, this is “America first”. Francis preaches “Jesus first”.

An example of Pope Francis’s slashing way of thinking is about beggars. Give to them, he says, always; no excuses.

I am grateful to the Pope for pricking my conscience. But is it, in reality, always true that one should give if asked? Should you give, for example, if asked aggressively, or by people who are very drunk or high? Is it always reasonable to assume that someone who begs is a “real” beggar? Might you sometimes be encouraging people who are not desperately poor but just like cheating? I have experienced such people. If you give automatically, might you not be making your own life too easy, feeling virtuous without bothering to work out real need?

In practice, I find myself giving only to beggars whom I like or trust. One cold evening recently, I fell into conversation with a homeless Irishman. We had a friendly talk. I offered him money. He gracefully refused it.

The next day, I found him outside a nearby shop, begging. As a sort of reward for refusing my money the previous day, I handed over £20. Was my judgment a fair one, or was I over-favouring charm? After all, the charmless beggar coaxes less out of the public, so he is the one with the greater need.

Monarchy is another form of leadership where symbols and gestures matter enormously. Unlike being pope or US president, however, a constitutional monarch has to be careful about breaking the rules, since this can seem arrogant or divisive.

The Prince of Wales will be 70 this year. To prepare for this event – which he calls “something of a milestone”

– he is reshaping his numerous charitable activities into one greater grouping: The Prince’s Foundation. Part of the work involves new housing. Prince Charles wants to encourage it, but worries that stonemasons, carpenters and others in “unique heritage crafts” are “disappearing at an alarming rate”. “Their skill seems too often swept aside,” he says.

The unique heritage craft for which His Royal Highness has so long been in training is called “reigning”. He is, in most respects, more fully prepared than any of his predecessors in history. But the craftsmanship shown by his mother is something no formal apprenticeship can ensure. It requires a constant, delicate judgment about how far to go – when to speak and when to be silent.

It also requires an inner calm, which recognises that it is more important for the constitutional monarch to “be”, rather than to “do”. Who can recall the present Queen pushing a cause too hard or throwing a tantrum? Her skills must not be swept aside.

Prince Charles is the heir to this craft, but can seem like an old man in a hurry. “Festina lente” is the useful Latin saying – make haste slowly.

Readers may recall that after appearing in the TV documentary Elizabeth: Our Queen, I was asked to answer a “diversity” questionnaire. I have now received the questionnaire, and indeed have been chided by the organisers for not filling it in.

But what should I say? It wants to know my disabilities, gender, sexuality and ethnic origin. The law of the land states that all of these are matters about which there should be no discrimination. Yet if I reveal I am white, my statistic will surely contribute to evidence that will be used to discriminate against white participation in television programmes.

Anyway, I feel my ethnic origin is nobody’s business. I am simply British. You are not allowed to say that on the form, of course.

READ MORE at telegraph.co.uk/opinion