Day: May 22, 2026

Bishop Barron speaks on U.S. religious roots ahead of nation’s 250th anniversary #Catholic While there has been a tendency in the United Sates "to hyper-stress separation of church and state," Bishop Robert Barron said "the roots of our country are deeply religious" and "the basic principles of the country are inescapably religious.” On May 17, thousands gathered on the National Mall in Washington, D.C., for the White House event celebrating “one nation under God” and "the connection between religion and our American democracy,”  Barron said.In an interview with EWTN News’ Colm Flynn ahead of the event, Barron discussed the “hugely important” phrase "one nation under God.”“In the written versions of the Gettysburg Address that [Abraham Lincoln] prepared before giving it, the phrase ‘under God’ is not there,” Barron explained.“But then when he was delivering it he added ... ‘under God,’“ Barron said. ”I think it represented a deep intuition that Lincoln had that you canʼt really understand our democracy without it.” The phrase “under God” is “meant to hold off tyranny,” he said. It is clear that “all kings and all rulers are under God, meaning under the judgment and authority of God. Our founders understood that.”“And that little phrase is meant to hold off that tendency to deify any political establishment, political party, political ruler. Weʼre a nation, yes indeed, but weʼre under God. Our laws are determined by God,” he said.“I love the First Amendment to our Constitution, which in its opening lines expresses very eloquently … the right balance,“ he said. ”Namely, ‘Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion.’”“But then thereʼs a second part, the second clause of that: ‘Congress shall make no law limiting the free exercise of religion,’” he said.“Thatʼs an eloquent balance. So thereʼs no officially state-sanctioned religion, but that does not mean that religion has no role in public life. On the contrary, because there should be no law restricting the free exercise of religion,” Barron said. Catholics’ role in public life and public officeCatholics in public office should bring “moral sensibility into their public decisions,” Barron said.“Weʼre not here to impose Catholicism on anybody,” he said. “But I think to bring a moral and spiritual sensibility into the decisions that you make at these high levels is altogether valid.”As a member of the White House Religious Liberty Commission, Barron said he met “lots of Catholics in the present administration” and told them to “bring Thomas Aquinas into your public life.”“By which I mean bring these great moral and spiritual principles that indeed undergird our democracy, but make them a lively presence in the work that you do,” he said.Barron further spoke about his time on the White House commission, where he received both criticism and praise.When asked to be a commissioner, “my first reaction was very positive,” Barron said. “I thought … ‘Theyʼre inviting a Catholic bishop to be a voice around the table in the formulation of this policy. Why would I say no?’”To say no would be “taking a Catholic voice away from that process,” he said.“I’m not implementing the policy. Iʼm making suggestions regarding the formulation of policy,” Barron explained. “The president could take or leave what we say … So Iʼm not implementing the presidentʼs policies. Iʼm helping to shape public policy.”“The commission was great. I spoke my mind in every setting. No one censored me,” said Barron, who was present at a White House Holy Week event when Pentecostal pastor Paula Cain White compared the president’s suffering to Jesus Christ’s.Barron said he was able to address issues within the administration, specifically about Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) “detainees in Chicago having access to sacraments and pastoral care.”The bishop took the matter to Homeland Security and “no one questioned” him. It was “a religious liberty issue,” because “people have a right to their sacraments and pastoral care,” he said.Barron also spoke out in regard to the president’s “critical remarks about the pope.”“I said in an X post that I have deep admiration for the president in regard to religion. Heʼs done wonderful things. But I said I think that was a disrespectful way to talk to the pope,” Barron said.“In regards to prudential judgment,” a president can “disagree with the pope,” Barron said. “But the pope is not ... just an ordinary hack politician that you can sort of talk in that flippant way to.” Bishop Robert Barron speaks with EWTN News’ Colm Flynn ahead of the May 17, 2026, White House event on “one nation under God” in Washington, D.C. | Credit: EWTN News “Heʼs the vicar of Christ, successor of Peter. Heʼs our Holy Father. And I just felt that was disrespectful, and I thought it was not a constructive contribution to the conversation,” he said.“Heʼs the Holy Father, so we have a filial relationship to him. Heʼs a father, weʼre like children … we have a family relationship to the pope. So itʼs different than just our relationship to a political leader.”“At the level of principle and the moral values that ought to be informing our life … we abide by what the pope is saying, but I think there can be disagreement at the prudential level,” Barron said.Dividing issues in the nation todayAmid numerous wars right now, Barron said “we should study” the just war tradition.It offers “very useful criteria, and I think the Churchʼs job is to bring these to consciousness and urge political leaders to apply them,” he said.“The Catechism of the Catholic Church says that when it comes to the evaluation and application of the criteria, that belongs to the civil authorities. And I think thereʼs great wisdom there too.”Barron also spoke to the ongoing matters with U.S. immigration enforcement.“A completely open border invites a lot of moral chaos, and a lot of catastrophe happens because of an open border. So the Church recognizes the legitimacy of that,” Barron said. “At the same time, the Church wants us to welcome the stranger and to be open to those who are in great need and those who are seeking refuge.”ICE “is a very legitimate expression of the governmentʼs authority, but … I think ICE is way too blunt a tool to use to solve the general issue of people in the country illegally,” Barron said.“I think a political solution has to be found. I donʼt think ICE is the right instrument to do that,” he said. “Iʼd invite people who are intimately involved in these things to have a good, morally informed conversation about it and come to good prudential judgments.”“Iʼm not an expert in immigration policy, and Iʼm not an expert in the economics that are prevailing on the ground in various situations,” he said. “I think we have to inform all those who are making those decisions, make sure they have a keen moral sensibility, [and] know what the principles are.”“But I think people of goodwill can, and obviously do, disagree about how they are applied … concretely,” he said.
Read More

Bishop Barron speaks on U.S. religious roots ahead of nation’s 250th anniversary #Catholic While there has been a tendency in the United Sates "to hyper-stress separation of church and state," Bishop Robert Barron said "the roots of our country are deeply religious" and "the basic principles of the country are inescapably religious.” On May 17, thousands gathered on the National Mall in Washington, D.C., for the White House event celebrating “one nation under God” and "the connection between religion and our American democracy,”  Barron said.In an interview with EWTN News’ Colm Flynn ahead of the event, Barron discussed the “hugely important” phrase "one nation under God.”“In the written versions of the Gettysburg Address that [Abraham Lincoln] prepared before giving it, the phrase ‘under God’ is not there,” Barron explained.“But then when he was delivering it he added … ‘under God,’“ Barron said. ”I think it represented a deep intuition that Lincoln had that you canʼt really understand our democracy without it.” The phrase “under God” is “meant to hold off tyranny,” he said. It is clear that “all kings and all rulers are under God, meaning under the judgment and authority of God. Our founders understood that.”“And that little phrase is meant to hold off that tendency to deify any political establishment, political party, political ruler. Weʼre a nation, yes indeed, but weʼre under God. Our laws are determined by God,” he said.“I love the First Amendment to our Constitution, which in its opening lines expresses very eloquently … the right balance,“ he said. ”Namely, ‘Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion.’”“But then thereʼs a second part, the second clause of that: ‘Congress shall make no law limiting the free exercise of religion,’” he said.“Thatʼs an eloquent balance. So thereʼs no officially state-sanctioned religion, but that does not mean that religion has no role in public life. On the contrary, because there should be no law restricting the free exercise of religion,” Barron said. Catholics’ role in public life and public officeCatholics in public office should bring “moral sensibility into their public decisions,” Barron said.“Weʼre not here to impose Catholicism on anybody,” he said. “But I think to bring a moral and spiritual sensibility into the decisions that you make at these high levels is altogether valid.”As a member of the White House Religious Liberty Commission, Barron said he met “lots of Catholics in the present administration” and told them to “bring Thomas Aquinas into your public life.”“By which I mean bring these great moral and spiritual principles that indeed undergird our democracy, but make them a lively presence in the work that you do,” he said.Barron further spoke about his time on the White House commission, where he received both criticism and praise.When asked to be a commissioner, “my first reaction was very positive,” Barron said. “I thought … ‘Theyʼre inviting a Catholic bishop to be a voice around the table in the formulation of this policy. Why would I say no?’”To say no would be “taking a Catholic voice away from that process,” he said.“I’m not implementing the policy. Iʼm making suggestions regarding the formulation of policy,” Barron explained. “The president could take or leave what we say … So Iʼm not implementing the presidentʼs policies. Iʼm helping to shape public policy.”“The commission was great. I spoke my mind in every setting. No one censored me,” said Barron, who was present at a White House Holy Week event when Pentecostal pastor Paula Cain White compared the president’s suffering to Jesus Christ’s.Barron said he was able to address issues within the administration, specifically about Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) “detainees in Chicago having access to sacraments and pastoral care.”The bishop took the matter to Homeland Security and “no one questioned” him. It was “a religious liberty issue,” because “people have a right to their sacraments and pastoral care,” he said.Barron also spoke out in regard to the president’s “critical remarks about the pope.”“I said in an X post that I have deep admiration for the president in regard to religion. Heʼs done wonderful things. But I said I think that was a disrespectful way to talk to the pope,” Barron said.“In regards to prudential judgment,” a president can “disagree with the pope,” Barron said. “But the pope is not … just an ordinary hack politician that you can sort of talk in that flippant way to.” Bishop Robert Barron speaks with EWTN News’ Colm Flynn ahead of the May 17, 2026, White House event on “one nation under God” in Washington, D.C. | Credit: EWTN News “Heʼs the vicar of Christ, successor of Peter. Heʼs our Holy Father. And I just felt that was disrespectful, and I thought it was not a constructive contribution to the conversation,” he said.“Heʼs the Holy Father, so we have a filial relationship to him. Heʼs a father, weʼre like children … we have a family relationship to the pope. So itʼs different than just our relationship to a political leader.”“At the level of principle and the moral values that ought to be informing our life … we abide by what the pope is saying, but I think there can be disagreement at the prudential level,” Barron said.Dividing issues in the nation todayAmid numerous wars right now, Barron said “we should study” the just war tradition.It offers “very useful criteria, and I think the Churchʼs job is to bring these to consciousness and urge political leaders to apply them,” he said.“The Catechism of the Catholic Church says that when it comes to the evaluation and application of the criteria, that belongs to the civil authorities. And I think thereʼs great wisdom there too.”Barron also spoke to the ongoing matters with U.S. immigration enforcement.“A completely open border invites a lot of moral chaos, and a lot of catastrophe happens because of an open border. So the Church recognizes the legitimacy of that,” Barron said. “At the same time, the Church wants us to welcome the stranger and to be open to those who are in great need and those who are seeking refuge.”ICE “is a very legitimate expression of the governmentʼs authority, but … I think ICE is way too blunt a tool to use to solve the general issue of people in the country illegally,” Barron said.“I think a political solution has to be found. I donʼt think ICE is the right instrument to do that,” he said. “Iʼd invite people who are intimately involved in these things to have a good, morally informed conversation about it and come to good prudential judgments.”“Iʼm not an expert in immigration policy, and Iʼm not an expert in the economics that are prevailing on the ground in various situations,” he said. “I think we have to inform all those who are making those decisions, make sure they have a keen moral sensibility, [and] know what the principles are.”“But I think people of goodwill can, and obviously do, disagree about how they are applied … concretely,” he said.

unitedyam

“There’s no officially state-sanctioned religion, but that does not mean that religion has no role in public life,” Bishop Robert Barron said.

Read More
Malta pro-life campaign challenges 6 parties on abortion, euthanasia #Catholic Maltese Prime Minister Robert Abela called a surprise general election for May 30, announcing the vote nine months before his Labour Partyʼs five-year term was scheduled to end. Citing geopolitical turmoil, particularly the war in Iran and volatile oil prices affecting Maltaʼs energy costs, Abela framed the early election as necessary to provide “stability” at a critical moment.The timing is politically advantageous. Abelaʼs Labour government holds a comfortable parliamentary majority, and opinion polls hint the party is on track to win a record fourth consecutive term.Yet the election has forced an uncomfortable conversation about abortion, a topic observers note that Maltese politicians often keep deliberately vague.A country deeply divided on abortionSince Maltaʼs constitution explicitly names Catholicism as the state religion, the nationʼs legal framework reflects that foundation by having a near-total prohibition on abortion. In line with Church teaching, treatment for ectopic pregnancies is permitted.Critics have often labeled the nation as having the most restrictive abortion laws in Europe and regularly called for more abortion rights. As external pressure for liberalization continues to mount, there is also deep internal division between younger, more urban voters who support some abortion access and a significant portion of the electorate that opposes it on moral or religious grounds.Some note that this tension has made abortion a political minefield. Rather than clearly stating whether they are “pro-life” or “pro-choice,” Maltese politicians allegedly employ careful ambiguity. They frame positions using broader language centered on “womenʼs health,” “medical emergencies,” “human rights,” or “legal clarity.” The use of such technical language allows them to address sensitive cases without explicitly endorsing wider abortion access.Pro-life advocates demand clarityAhead of the May 30 election, one of Maltaʼs largest and most prolific pro-life groups, the Life Network Foundation, issued a direct question to all political parties.It demanded that each of Maltaʼs six major political parties participating in the elections clearly state whether they will support changes to Maltese law that would introduce abortion and voluntary assisted euthanasia in the next legislature. The foundation asked for a simple yes-or-no answer.Notably, the Labour government has already broken ranks on one issue. On May 15, it pledged to hold a referendum on voluntary assisted euthanasia if reelected but remained silent on abortion.As of May 22, four of the six parties had responded to the Life Network Foundationʼs questionnaire. The foundation has pledged to publish all responses or publicly note which parties refused to answer.By asking for a direct answer on pro-life issues, it gives Maltaʼs political factions no room to avoid stating their values directly to voters on these key issues. It also allows for more accountability and transparency in the political arena ahead of elections.Pro-abortion encroachmentGiven Maltaʼs strong anti-abortion history and stance, there has been increased activity by pro-abortion organizations to slowly increase abortion rights in the country. Most notably, Women on Waves, a Dutch pro-abortion organization, announced in mid-April that it had installed approximately 15 abortion lock safes around Malta.Each safe contains one mifepristone pill and four misoprostol pills, collectively making up the chemical abortion pill regimen. Women interested in accessing abortion would email the organization, which would provide the location of the abortion safes and the code to unlock the safe.In response to this, the National Council of Women Malta called for legal action into the placement of these abortion pill safes. “Any initiative which appears to facilitate access to abortion pills in Malta raises serious concerns about respect for the law, public safety, the protection of vulnerable women, and the protection of unborn life,” the council stated, requesting authorities investigate the placement of these safes.Questions were also raised about the verification aspects of obtaining these abortion pills and what medical safeguards were in place to ensure they did not fall into the wrong hands. In response, Rebecca Gomperts, the founder of Women on Waves, noted that her organization was simply fulfilling an “unmet demand.”Women on Waves has operated in Malta since 2007. It gained notoriety and visibility in recent years through high-profile campaigns, including at the Malta Maritime Museum, featuring pro-abortion art. The organization has faced backlash in Spain and Poland from citizens and municipalities alike, but its Malta operation is particularly provocative given the countryʼs near-total prohibition on abortion.
Read More

Malta pro-life campaign challenges 6 parties on abortion, euthanasia #Catholic Maltese Prime Minister Robert Abela called a surprise general election for May 30, announcing the vote nine months before his Labour Partyʼs five-year term was scheduled to end. Citing geopolitical turmoil, particularly the war in Iran and volatile oil prices affecting Maltaʼs energy costs, Abela framed the early election as necessary to provide “stability” at a critical moment.The timing is politically advantageous. Abelaʼs Labour government holds a comfortable parliamentary majority, and opinion polls hint the party is on track to win a record fourth consecutive term.Yet the election has forced an uncomfortable conversation about abortion, a topic observers note that Maltese politicians often keep deliberately vague.A country deeply divided on abortionSince Maltaʼs constitution explicitly names Catholicism as the state religion, the nationʼs legal framework reflects that foundation by having a near-total prohibition on abortion. In line with Church teaching, treatment for ectopic pregnancies is permitted.Critics have often labeled the nation as having the most restrictive abortion laws in Europe and regularly called for more abortion rights. As external pressure for liberalization continues to mount, there is also deep internal division between younger, more urban voters who support some abortion access and a significant portion of the electorate that opposes it on moral or religious grounds.Some note that this tension has made abortion a political minefield. Rather than clearly stating whether they are “pro-life” or “pro-choice,” Maltese politicians allegedly employ careful ambiguity. They frame positions using broader language centered on “womenʼs health,” “medical emergencies,” “human rights,” or “legal clarity.” The use of such technical language allows them to address sensitive cases without explicitly endorsing wider abortion access.Pro-life advocates demand clarityAhead of the May 30 election, one of Maltaʼs largest and most prolific pro-life groups, the Life Network Foundation, issued a direct question to all political parties.It demanded that each of Maltaʼs six major political parties participating in the elections clearly state whether they will support changes to Maltese law that would introduce abortion and voluntary assisted euthanasia in the next legislature. The foundation asked for a simple yes-or-no answer.Notably, the Labour government has already broken ranks on one issue. On May 15, it pledged to hold a referendum on voluntary assisted euthanasia if reelected but remained silent on abortion.As of May 22, four of the six parties had responded to the Life Network Foundationʼs questionnaire. The foundation has pledged to publish all responses or publicly note which parties refused to answer.By asking for a direct answer on pro-life issues, it gives Maltaʼs political factions no room to avoid stating their values directly to voters on these key issues. It also allows for more accountability and transparency in the political arena ahead of elections.Pro-abortion encroachmentGiven Maltaʼs strong anti-abortion history and stance, there has been increased activity by pro-abortion organizations to slowly increase abortion rights in the country. Most notably, Women on Waves, a Dutch pro-abortion organization, announced in mid-April that it had installed approximately 15 abortion lock safes around Malta.Each safe contains one mifepristone pill and four misoprostol pills, collectively making up the chemical abortion pill regimen. Women interested in accessing abortion would email the organization, which would provide the location of the abortion safes and the code to unlock the safe.In response to this, the National Council of Women Malta called for legal action into the placement of these abortion pill safes. “Any initiative which appears to facilitate access to abortion pills in Malta raises serious concerns about respect for the law, public safety, the protection of vulnerable women, and the protection of unborn life,” the council stated, requesting authorities investigate the placement of these safes.Questions were also raised about the verification aspects of obtaining these abortion pills and what medical safeguards were in place to ensure they did not fall into the wrong hands. In response, Rebecca Gomperts, the founder of Women on Waves, noted that her organization was simply fulfilling an “unmet demand.”Women on Waves has operated in Malta since 2007. It gained notoriety and visibility in recent years through high-profile campaigns, including at the Malta Maritime Museum, featuring pro-abortion art. The organization has faced backlash in Spain and Poland from citizens and municipalities alike, but its Malta operation is particularly provocative given the countryʼs near-total prohibition on abortion.

unitedyam

A leading pro-life nongovernmental organization is asking Malta’s six political parties to declare publicly — yes or no — whether they would back abortion or euthanasia laws ahead of the May 30 vote.

Read More

The Sky Today on Friday, May 22: Busy moons around Jupiter

unitedyam

Looking for a sky event this week? Check out our full Sky This Week column.  May 21: Check in on Saturn and Mars Tonight we’re focused on Jupiter, as two of its Galilean moons cross the planet’ disk this evening. East Coast observers can zoom in on the gas giant shortly after sunset to see Io aloneContinue reading “The Sky Today on Friday, May 22: Busy moons around Jupiter”

The post The Sky Today on Friday, May 22: Busy moons around Jupiter appeared first on Astronomy Magazine.

Read More