Reaction

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
Canadian priest offered euthanasia twice while recovering from hip fracture #Catholic A priest from Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, recovering from a hip fracture at Vancouver General Hospital (VGH) said he was twice offered assisted death by healthcare staff who knew he was a priest and opposed to euthanasia — a practice critics say is growing as medical professionals are increasingly encouraged to initiate such conversations.“There are some things you just don’t talk about to some people,” said Father Larry Holland, who has completed studies in healthcare chaplaincy in addition to serving at numerous parishes in the Archdiocese of Vancouver.He described his reaction when a doctor brought up the option of medical aid in dying (MAID) should his condition deteriorate. “I think I was very shocked,” he said. “It is such a sensitive subject.”Holland, 79, is currently convalescing at VGH after suffering a hip fracture from a fall in his bathroom on Christmas Day. He spoke to The B.C. Catholic about the offers of MAID from two healthcare professionals, despite their knowing he was a Catholic priest.Holland said he wasn’t dying then or now and that the doctor’s mention of MAID left him “kind of silent” for a moment. The doctor then raised the subject again, saying it’s “something they have to discuss with someone who’s been given a terminal diagnosis.”Holland recalled telling the doctor he was morally opposed to euthanasia. The doctor explained that “he just wanted to make sure that, if a [terminal] diagnosis came up or not … I knew of the different services I had access to.”Weeks later, a second offer of MAID came from a nurse who the priest said seemed uncomfortable raising the topic and was likely doing so out of compassion because of the pain he was enduring.“It’s a false compassion, really,” he said.A spokesman for Vancouver Coastal Health, which operates VGH, told The B.C. Catholic in an email that “staff may consider bringing up MAID based on their clinical judgment, provided they possess the necessary knowledge and skills to do so.”Staff are also “responsible for answering questions when patients bring up the topic of MAID,” the spokesman said.The two incidents arise as Canada approaches 100,000 assisted dying deaths.Father Larry Lynn, the archdiocese’s pro-life chaplain, said he was shocked to hear about Holland’s case.“This must surely be among the most appalling examples of Canada’s coercive and insensitive euthanasia regime,” Lynn said in an interview.He said it’s disturbing that a healthcare provider suggests euthanasia with any patient, and particularly when the patient is a consecrated religious known to be morally opposed. “It places the medical practitioner into the role of the devil, tempting a vulnerable person into mortal sin.”He’s equally troubled that Canadian euthanasia providers aren’t ruling out initiating discussions with Roman Catholics about MAID. In a document titled “Bringing up Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID) as a Clinical Care Option,” the Canadian Association of MAID Assessors and Providers recommends against assuming patients oppose MAID because of their faith.The document says: “Healthcare professionals may draw incorrect assumptions about a person’s views on MAID; e.g., they may assume that a patient objects to MAID because she is a Roman Catholic nun, and yet Roman Catholic nuns and others dedicated to a faith-based way of life have requested MAID.” The booklet does not provide a source for the information.An updated version published in March removes the Catholic reference but gives the same advice regarding people of a “faith community” and even those of “strong faith.”Lynn called it “diabolical” to use a nun as an example for overcoming a patient’s moral objections.The booklet reflects a recent trend of encouraging healthcare personnel to initiate MAID discussions with patients. In November 2025, The B.C. Catholic reported on a little-known 2023 Health Canada document urging health authorities and professional bodies to adopt “practice standards” requiring doctors and nurse practitioners to raise MAID with certain patients.The MAID assessors and providers document similarly says physicians and nurse practitioners involved in care planning and consent processes “have a professional obligation to initiate a discussion about MAID if a patient might be eligible for MAID.” However, Health Canada does not have the authority to require provinces or health authorities to adopt such guidelines and The B.C. Catholic found no evidence of any public agency or professional body in British Columbia doing so.Amanda Achtman, creator of the anti-euthanasia project Dying to Meet You and ethics director of Canadian Physicians for Life, said initiating MAID discussions in a medical setting is a form of coercion that attacks patients’ deepest convictions when they’re vulnerable. To “torment” someone who has deeply held beliefs with an offer of MAID is “an attack on their identity,” Achtman said.Holland admitted he was in so much pain that he could “feel the temptation” to accept MAID. “It’s a human reaction. We always look for the easy way out.”Conservative member of Parliament Garnett Genuis has introduced Bill C-260, An Act to Prevent Coercion of Persons Not Seeking Medical Assistance in Dying, which would prohibit federal employees from proactively offering or recommending MAID. The bill resulted from incidents of bureaucrats such as veterans counselors trying to steer vulnerable people toward assisted dying.The Alberta government introduced legislation in March that would restrict regulated health professionals from providing information about MAID to their patients unless the patient brings it up. The Safeguards for Last Resort Termination of Life Act would also restrict the public display of MAID information, such as posters, within healthcare facilities.The bill is worth supporting, said Achtman, who lives in Calgary. “Simply being offered euthanasia already kills the person, because it defeats and deflates their sense of self-worth and value.”The unwanted initiation of MAID discussions in Canada made international headlines in March after Achtman shared the story of an 84-year-old woman, Miriam Lancaster, who went to VGH last year for severe back pain. She said the first doctor she spoke with in the emergency room raised MAID before any diagnostic work had been done. Lancaster’s daughter was present and confirmed the incident, adding her mother eventually responded to rehabilitation and rest.The Catholic chaplain at VGH, Father Ronald Sequeira, said it’s a constant struggle to help suffering patients not lose hope. He said he tries to offer them “some kind of encouragement and comfort,” but many give up.“The moment you lose hope, the devil comes in, in different personalities, and says, ‘Do you want MAID? I don’t want people to suffer.’”Patients often don’t realize that suffering is redemptive, he said. “God makes us more pure, more strong, through the suffering when we offer it up,” Sequeira said. “So we give hope — help them not to lose hope.”Holland said turning down an offer of death opens one to new experiences. Even enduring pain “can encourage growth,” he said. “It can motivate you, it can open up new worlds, new vistas, new opportunities,” including enriched relationships.He said he is sharing his story in the hope it will help others. “I went through it; you can go through it, too.”This story was first published in The B.C. Catholic and is reprinted here with permission and adaptations.
Read More

Canadian priest offered euthanasia twice while recovering from hip fracture #Catholic A priest from Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, recovering from a hip fracture at Vancouver General Hospital (VGH) said he was twice offered assisted death by healthcare staff who knew he was a priest and opposed to euthanasia — a practice critics say is growing as medical professionals are increasingly encouraged to initiate such conversations.“There are some things you just don’t talk about to some people,” said Father Larry Holland, who has completed studies in healthcare chaplaincy in addition to serving at numerous parishes in the Archdiocese of Vancouver.He described his reaction when a doctor brought up the option of medical aid in dying (MAID) should his condition deteriorate. “I think I was very shocked,” he said. “It is such a sensitive subject.”Holland, 79, is currently convalescing at VGH after suffering a hip fracture from a fall in his bathroom on Christmas Day. He spoke to The B.C. Catholic about the offers of MAID from two healthcare professionals, despite their knowing he was a Catholic priest.Holland said he wasn’t dying then or now and that the doctor’s mention of MAID left him “kind of silent” for a moment. The doctor then raised the subject again, saying it’s “something they have to discuss with someone who’s been given a terminal diagnosis.”Holland recalled telling the doctor he was morally opposed to euthanasia. The doctor explained that “he just wanted to make sure that, if a [terminal] diagnosis came up or not … I knew of the different services I had access to.”Weeks later, a second offer of MAID came from a nurse who the priest said seemed uncomfortable raising the topic and was likely doing so out of compassion because of the pain he was enduring.“It’s a false compassion, really,” he said.A spokesman for Vancouver Coastal Health, which operates VGH, told The B.C. Catholic in an email that “staff may consider bringing up MAID based on their clinical judgment, provided they possess the necessary knowledge and skills to do so.”Staff are also “responsible for answering questions when patients bring up the topic of MAID,” the spokesman said.The two incidents arise as Canada approaches 100,000 assisted dying deaths.Father Larry Lynn, the archdiocese’s pro-life chaplain, said he was shocked to hear about Holland’s case.“This must surely be among the most appalling examples of Canada’s coercive and insensitive euthanasia regime,” Lynn said in an interview.He said it’s disturbing that a healthcare provider suggests euthanasia with any patient, and particularly when the patient is a consecrated religious known to be morally opposed. “It places the medical practitioner into the role of the devil, tempting a vulnerable person into mortal sin.”He’s equally troubled that Canadian euthanasia providers aren’t ruling out initiating discussions with Roman Catholics about MAID. In a document titled “Bringing up Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID) as a Clinical Care Option,” the Canadian Association of MAID Assessors and Providers recommends against assuming patients oppose MAID because of their faith.The document says: “Healthcare professionals may draw incorrect assumptions about a person’s views on MAID; e.g., they may assume that a patient objects to MAID because she is a Roman Catholic nun, and yet Roman Catholic nuns and others dedicated to a faith-based way of life have requested MAID.” The booklet does not provide a source for the information.An updated version published in March removes the Catholic reference but gives the same advice regarding people of a “faith community” and even those of “strong faith.”Lynn called it “diabolical” to use a nun as an example for overcoming a patient’s moral objections.The booklet reflects a recent trend of encouraging healthcare personnel to initiate MAID discussions with patients. In November 2025, The B.C. Catholic reported on a little-known 2023 Health Canada document urging health authorities and professional bodies to adopt “practice standards” requiring doctors and nurse practitioners to raise MAID with certain patients.The MAID assessors and providers document similarly says physicians and nurse practitioners involved in care planning and consent processes “have a professional obligation to initiate a discussion about MAID if a patient might be eligible for MAID.” However, Health Canada does not have the authority to require provinces or health authorities to adopt such guidelines and The B.C. Catholic found no evidence of any public agency or professional body in British Columbia doing so.Amanda Achtman, creator of the anti-euthanasia project Dying to Meet You and ethics director of Canadian Physicians for Life, said initiating MAID discussions in a medical setting is a form of coercion that attacks patients’ deepest convictions when they’re vulnerable. To “torment” someone who has deeply held beliefs with an offer of MAID is “an attack on their identity,” Achtman said.Holland admitted he was in so much pain that he could “feel the temptation” to accept MAID. “It’s a human reaction. We always look for the easy way out.”Conservative member of Parliament Garnett Genuis has introduced Bill C-260, An Act to Prevent Coercion of Persons Not Seeking Medical Assistance in Dying, which would prohibit federal employees from proactively offering or recommending MAID. The bill resulted from incidents of bureaucrats such as veterans counselors trying to steer vulnerable people toward assisted dying.The Alberta government introduced legislation in March that would restrict regulated health professionals from providing information about MAID to their patients unless the patient brings it up. The Safeguards for Last Resort Termination of Life Act would also restrict the public display of MAID information, such as posters, within healthcare facilities.The bill is worth supporting, said Achtman, who lives in Calgary. “Simply being offered euthanasia already kills the person, because it defeats and deflates their sense of self-worth and value.”The unwanted initiation of MAID discussions in Canada made international headlines in March after Achtman shared the story of an 84-year-old woman, Miriam Lancaster, who went to VGH last year for severe back pain. She said the first doctor she spoke with in the emergency room raised MAID before any diagnostic work had been done. Lancaster’s daughter was present and confirmed the incident, adding her mother eventually responded to rehabilitation and rest.The Catholic chaplain at VGH, Father Ronald Sequeira, said it’s a constant struggle to help suffering patients not lose hope. He said he tries to offer them “some kind of encouragement and comfort,” but many give up.“The moment you lose hope, the devil comes in, in different personalities, and says, ‘Do you want MAID? I don’t want people to suffer.’”Patients often don’t realize that suffering is redemptive, he said. “God makes us more pure, more strong, through the suffering when we offer it up,” Sequeira said. “So we give hope — help them not to lose hope.”Holland said turning down an offer of death opens one to new experiences. Even enduring pain “can encourage growth,” he said. “It can motivate you, it can open up new worlds, new vistas, new opportunities,” including enriched relationships.He said he is sharing his story in the hope it will help others. “I went through it; you can go through it, too.”This story was first published in The B.C. Catholic and is reprinted here with permission and adaptations.

unitedyam

A Vancouver priest says he was twice offered assisted death by hospital medical staff who knew he was a priest and opposed to euthanasia — a practice critics say is growing.

Read More
Trump’s comments on Pope Leo called ‘disrespectful’ as Americans react #Catholic Catholic bishops and U.S. elected officials have publicly criticized the president’s statements about Pope Leo XIV.President Donald Trump called Leo “weak on crime and terrible for foreign policy” in a lengthy social media post April 12 that drew response from the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) and elected officials.Bishop Robert Barron of the Diocese of Winona-Rochester, Minnesota, called Trump’s attack on Pope Leo XIV “disrespectful." Barron, who serves on Trump’s Religious Liberty Commission, said in a post on X that Trump’s comments “were entirely inappropriate and disrespectful” and “I think the president owes the pope an apology.”“[Trump’s comments] don’t contribute at all to a constructive conversation,” he said. “It is the pope’s prerogative to articulate Catholic doctrine and the principles that govern the moral life. In regard to the concrete application of those principles, people of goodwill can and do disagree.”Barron encouraged Catholic Trump officials to arrange a meeting with Vatican officials “so that a real dialogue can take place,” saying “this is far preferable to the statements on social media.”Bishop Michael Burbidge of Arlington, Virginia, said in a social media post: “Along with Archbishop [Paul] Coakley, president of the USCCB, and my brother bishops, I was disheartened by recent comments from President Trump concerning Pope Leo XIV and the Church. I pray that civility and respect are fully restored as together, with God’s grace, we work for peace and harmony among all people. May we also be united in our prayer for the end of war and violence so that Christ’s peace reigns throughout the world and in our hearts.”Palm Beach, Florida, Bishop Manuel de Jesús Rodríguez posted on X: “The @DiocesePB stands firm with our Holy Father, @Pontifex, and strongly rejects the disrespectful and violent attacks that Donald J. Trump has directed against the Holy Father.”Buffalo, New York, Bishop Michael Fisher posted on X: “This is not about politics but the very cause of humanity.”The Catholic Association's Ashley McGuire said in a statement: “The Catholic Church does not in any way fit into American political boxes. It will always prioritize the protection of innocent life in all its stages as well as the cause of the poor and marginalized. Insulting the pope, and all Catholics by extension, with the hope of making the Church bend to American political agendas, is discouraging and counterproductive.” McGuire added: “We pray that President Trump apologizes to Pope Leo.”U.S. officials' reaction beginsRepublican Vice President JD Vance, who is Catholic, has not yet commented on the matter, nor has Secretary of State Marco Rubio, also a Catholic.Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Arizona, who is Catholic, posted on X that “I find it abhorrent that the president of the United States would publicly attack the successor of St. Peter.”U.S. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said on X that Trump “shamefully attacked” the pope. Few Republican elected officials have spoken out.TweetDemocratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom posted on X: “Hey @GOP, you good with your guy directly attacking the pope now?”Rep. Lukas Schubert, a Republican Montana state lawmaker, disputed the presidentʼs statement that the pope is a “liberal person.”“Pope Leo is significantly further to the right than President Trump on abortion, gay marriage, and family values. Also he is more America First on the Iran War,” Schubert said.AI imageTrump also posted an AI-created image on Truth Social that appeared to portray himself as Jesus Christ, healing the sick, which led several Catholics to accuse the president of blasphemy.Edward Feser, a Catholic philosopher and professor at Pasadena City College, posted on X that Trump’s comments illustrate “how utter enslavement to the sin of pride makes a man unsuitable for the presidency.”“For all their faults, previous presidents had the visceral understanding of proper boundaries not to attack the vicar of Christ even when they disagreed with him,” he said.Feser quoted Daniel 11:36-37 in response to Trump’s AI image of himself as Christ, which reads: “And the king shall do according to his will; he shall exalt himself and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak astonishing things against the God of gods … He shall not give heed to any other god, for he shall magnify himself above all.”In reaction to the AI photo, Matt Fradd, the host of “Pints With Aquinas,“ urged Catholics to “offer a rosary today for Donald Trump and all blasphemers. … Seriously. Do it. I will too.”TweetRep. Shontel Brown, D-Ohio, did not directly reference Trumpʼs remarks about the pope but criticized the AI-created image on X: “There aren’t enough words to denounce how wrong this is.”The comments came after Leo criticized the Iran war and Trump’s rhetoric about targeting the entire civilization of Iran. Leo said in response to the post: “I have no fear neither of the Trump administration nor of speaking out loudly about the message of the Gospel.”Marjorie Taylor Greene, a former Republican congresswoman who was a strong ally of Trump before splitting with him on the Iran war and his handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files, posted on X that Trump “attacked the pope because the pope is rightly against Trump’s war in Iran and then he posted this picture of himself as if he is replacing Jesus.”“This comes after last week’s post of his evil tirade on Easter and then threatening to kill an entire civilization,” she said. “I completely denounce this and I’m praying against it!!!”‘Fuels division’Father Robert Sirico, the founder of the Acton Institute, said in a statement that Leo “has both the right and the duty to speak prophetically on matters of war and peace, the dignity of the human person, and the moral limits of force — even when his words discomfort political leaders.”He said Trump’s post does not “strengthen America’s moral standing but “merely fuels division.”Sirico also added that Catholics can disagree with popes on prudential judgments, such as foreign policy or crime, which he said are not infallible: “The Church herself teaches that such applications of principle admit of legitimate debate.”This story was updated at 11:50 a.m. ET on April 13, 2026, with comments from Buffalo, New York, Bishop Michael Fisher and The Catholic Associationʼs Ashley McGuire.
Read More

Trump’s comments on Pope Leo called ‘disrespectful’ as Americans react #Catholic Catholic bishops and U.S. elected officials have publicly criticized the president’s statements about Pope Leo XIV.President Donald Trump called Leo “weak on crime and terrible for foreign policy” in a lengthy social media post April 12 that drew response from the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) and elected officials.Bishop Robert Barron of the Diocese of Winona-Rochester, Minnesota, called Trump’s attack on Pope Leo XIV “disrespectful." Barron, who serves on Trump’s Religious Liberty Commission, said in a post on X that Trump’s comments “were entirely inappropriate and disrespectful” and “I think the president owes the pope an apology.”“[Trump’s comments] don’t contribute at all to a constructive conversation,” he said. “It is the pope’s prerogative to articulate Catholic doctrine and the principles that govern the moral life. In regard to the concrete application of those principles, people of goodwill can and do disagree.”Barron encouraged Catholic Trump officials to arrange a meeting with Vatican officials “so that a real dialogue can take place,” saying “this is far preferable to the statements on social media.”Bishop Michael Burbidge of Arlington, Virginia, said in a social media post: “Along with Archbishop [Paul] Coakley, president of the USCCB, and my brother bishops, I was disheartened by recent comments from President Trump concerning Pope Leo XIV and the Church. I pray that civility and respect are fully restored as together, with God’s grace, we work for peace and harmony among all people. May we also be united in our prayer for the end of war and violence so that Christ’s peace reigns throughout the world and in our hearts.”Palm Beach, Florida, Bishop Manuel de Jesús Rodríguez posted on X: “The @DiocesePB stands firm with our Holy Father, @Pontifex, and strongly rejects the disrespectful and violent attacks that Donald J. Trump has directed against the Holy Father.”Buffalo, New York, Bishop Michael Fisher posted on X: “This is not about politics but the very cause of humanity.”The Catholic Association's Ashley McGuire said in a statement: “The Catholic Church does not in any way fit into American political boxes. It will always prioritize the protection of innocent life in all its stages as well as the cause of the poor and marginalized. Insulting the pope, and all Catholics by extension, with the hope of making the Church bend to American political agendas, is discouraging and counterproductive.” McGuire added: “We pray that President Trump apologizes to Pope Leo.”U.S. officials' reaction beginsRepublican Vice President JD Vance, who is Catholic, has not yet commented on the matter, nor has Secretary of State Marco Rubio, also a Catholic.Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Arizona, who is Catholic, posted on X that “I find it abhorrent that the president of the United States would publicly attack the successor of St. Peter.”U.S. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said on X that Trump “shamefully attacked” the pope. Few Republican elected officials have spoken out.TweetDemocratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom posted on X: “Hey @GOP, you good with your guy directly attacking the pope now?”Rep. Lukas Schubert, a Republican Montana state lawmaker, disputed the presidentʼs statement that the pope is a “liberal person.”“Pope Leo is significantly further to the right than President Trump on abortion, gay marriage, and family values. Also he is more America First on the Iran War,” Schubert said.AI imageTrump also posted an AI-created image on Truth Social that appeared to portray himself as Jesus Christ, healing the sick, which led several Catholics to accuse the president of blasphemy.Edward Feser, a Catholic philosopher and professor at Pasadena City College, posted on X that Trump’s comments illustrate “how utter enslavement to the sin of pride makes a man unsuitable for the presidency.”“For all their faults, previous presidents had the visceral understanding of proper boundaries not to attack the vicar of Christ even when they disagreed with him,” he said.Feser quoted Daniel 11:36-37 in response to Trump’s AI image of himself as Christ, which reads: “And the king shall do according to his will; he shall exalt himself and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak astonishing things against the God of gods … He shall not give heed to any other god, for he shall magnify himself above all.”In reaction to the AI photo, Matt Fradd, the host of “Pints With Aquinas,“ urged Catholics to “offer a rosary today for Donald Trump and all blasphemers. … Seriously. Do it. I will too.”TweetRep. Shontel Brown, D-Ohio, did not directly reference Trumpʼs remarks about the pope but criticized the AI-created image on X: “There aren’t enough words to denounce how wrong this is.”The comments came after Leo criticized the Iran war and Trump’s rhetoric about targeting the entire civilization of Iran. Leo said in response to the post: “I have no fear neither of the Trump administration nor of speaking out loudly about the message of the Gospel.”Marjorie Taylor Greene, a former Republican congresswoman who was a strong ally of Trump before splitting with him on the Iran war and his handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files, posted on X that Trump “attacked the pope because the pope is rightly against Trump’s war in Iran and then he posted this picture of himself as if he is replacing Jesus.”“This comes after last week’s post of his evil tirade on Easter and then threatening to kill an entire civilization,” she said. “I completely denounce this and I’m praying against it!!!”‘Fuels division’Father Robert Sirico, the founder of the Acton Institute, said in a statement that Leo “has both the right and the duty to speak prophetically on matters of war and peace, the dignity of the human person, and the moral limits of force — even when his words discomfort political leaders.”He said Trump’s post does not “strengthen America’s moral standing but “merely fuels division.”Sirico also added that Catholics can disagree with popes on prudential judgments, such as foreign policy or crime, which he said are not infallible: “The Church herself teaches that such applications of principle admit of legitimate debate.”This story was updated at 11:50 a.m. ET on April 13, 2026, with comments from Buffalo, New York, Bishop Michael Fisher and The Catholic Associationʼs Ashley McGuire.

unitedyam

President Donald Trump called Leo “weak on crime and terrible for foreign policy” in a lengthy social media post April 12 that drew response from U.S. bishops and elected officials.

Read More
Why Pakistan’s bishops doubt government will act on minor’s forced marriage #Catholic LAHORE, Pakistan — The head of the Catholic Church in Pakistan has expressed a guarded response to government committees formed to review a recent ruling by the country’s top constitutional court that upheld the marriage and conversion of a Christian minor.Federal Minister for Information and Broadcasting Attaullah Tarar announced on Easter Sunday, April 5, that the government had constituted a committee to examine the March 25 judgment of the Federal Constitutional Court validating the marriage of 13-year-old Maria Shahbaz to 30-year-old Shaheryar Ahmad. A protest for Maria Shahbaz outside Hyderabad Press Club, organized by the Catholic Bishops’ National Commission for Justice and Peace, on April 4, 2026, in Pakistan. | Credit: Bishop Samson Shukardin Bishop Samson Shukardin of Hyderabad, president of the Pakistan Catholic Bishops’ Conference (PCBC), voiced skepticism about the initiative.“These issues often subside by the time such committees make their reports public. The process is deliberately delayed so that people forget,” he told EWTN News.“This is fundamentally a religious freedom issue. Consent is often coerced from minors. We await a genuine response from the government. Many Muslim clerics support us but have avoided joining public protests,” he added.A father’s accountAccording to Maria’s father, Shehbaz Masih, his daughter was abducted, forcibly converted to Islam, and married without consent.A certificate issued by the National Database and Registration Authority (NADRA) submitted by the family states that Maria was 13 at the time of the marriage — below the legal minimum age of 18. The family has since taken refuge in a shelter and was unavailable for comment.The case dates back to July 2025, when Masih, a resident of Lahore, reported that his daughter had been abducted by a Muslim man after stepping out to a nearby shop.Dismissing a petition filed by the father seeking custody, the court ruled that the marriage was valid under “Muhammadan law” and that the husband held lawful guardianship.Protests and backlashThe judgment triggered widespread reaction on social media, along with protests, press conferences, and conventions across the country. At least three Catholic bishops, along with the PCBC, issued statements urging authorities to review the ruling.The backlash prompted government engagement with the concerns of the country’s Christian minority, estimated at 1.37% (3.28 million people).Addressing an interfaith Easter gathering in Lahore, Tarar assured Christian leaders of his support, saying the committee’s recommendations would be submitted to the Ministry of Law and Justice within a week. Archbishop Azad Marshall, moderator/president bishop of the Church of Pakistan, a united Protestant denomination, meets with ecumenical leaders and Christian politicians following an April 6, 2026, consultation on the Maria Shahbaz case at Waris Road, Lahore. | Credit: Church of Pakistan Legal dimensionsMeanwhile, Punjab Minister for Minorities Affairs Ramesh Singh Arora said his department was forming a parallel committee to examine the legal dimensions of the case.Mary James Gill, a Christian lawyer, former lawmaker, and executive director of the Center for Law and Justice who serves on the committee, welcomed the move as a “genuine concern to find a way forward.”“It is highly encouraging that a state representative personally took up the issue. However, we are still in a consultative process,” she told EWTN News, noting shortcomings in both the lower courts and within the affected community.“The petition was filed under Section 491 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which pertains to habeas corpus, and not to determining the exact age of the girl — a question that remains disputed,” Gill said.“Regrettably, no such verification was carried out in the lower courts. In cases where documentation is ambiguous, magistrates and sessions judges tend to rely on in-person statements, consent, and their own observations.”She noted that the Christian Marriage Act of 1872 governs the solemnization of marriages involving one or more Christians.“Similarly, the personal laws of both Christianity and Islam in Pakistan remain silent on the age of conversion. Church leaders need to revisit and update these frameworks. At the same time, parents must place greater emphasis on the ideological and moral formation of their children,” she added.In an April 6 letter to the law ministry, Anthony Naveed, deputy speaker of the Sindh Assembly, urged the federal government to address “serious legal gaps” exposed by the ruling and called for uniform amendments aligning provincial laws with Balochistan’s legislation, which explicitly invalidates child marriages.A pattern of abuseFor decades, rights advocates have called for stronger legal and administrative measures to prevent the abduction and forced religious conversion of girls from minority communities.At least 515 cases of abduction and forced conversion of minority girls and women were reported between 2021 and 2025, according to the Center for Social Justice. Hindu girls accounted for 69% (353 cases), followed by Christian girls at 31% (160 cases). Most victims were under 18, with cases concentrated in Sindh and Punjab.Shukardin said courts in the Muslim-majority country are not consistently applying laws prohibiting marriage under 18.“The Church is not in favor of marriages involving conversion under such circumstances. We demand safety for our daughters and will continue to raise our voice for underage brides of any religion,” he said.
Read More

Why Pakistan’s bishops doubt government will act on minor’s forced marriage #Catholic LAHORE, Pakistan — The head of the Catholic Church in Pakistan has expressed a guarded response to government committees formed to review a recent ruling by the country’s top constitutional court that upheld the marriage and conversion of a Christian minor.Federal Minister for Information and Broadcasting Attaullah Tarar announced on Easter Sunday, April 5, that the government had constituted a committee to examine the March 25 judgment of the Federal Constitutional Court validating the marriage of 13-year-old Maria Shahbaz to 30-year-old Shaheryar Ahmad. A protest for Maria Shahbaz outside Hyderabad Press Club, organized by the Catholic Bishops’ National Commission for Justice and Peace, on April 4, 2026, in Pakistan. | Credit: Bishop Samson Shukardin Bishop Samson Shukardin of Hyderabad, president of the Pakistan Catholic Bishops’ Conference (PCBC), voiced skepticism about the initiative.“These issues often subside by the time such committees make their reports public. The process is deliberately delayed so that people forget,” he told EWTN News.“This is fundamentally a religious freedom issue. Consent is often coerced from minors. We await a genuine response from the government. Many Muslim clerics support us but have avoided joining public protests,” he added.A father’s accountAccording to Maria’s father, Shehbaz Masih, his daughter was abducted, forcibly converted to Islam, and married without consent.A certificate issued by the National Database and Registration Authority (NADRA) submitted by the family states that Maria was 13 at the time of the marriage — below the legal minimum age of 18. The family has since taken refuge in a shelter and was unavailable for comment.The case dates back to July 2025, when Masih, a resident of Lahore, reported that his daughter had been abducted by a Muslim man after stepping out to a nearby shop.Dismissing a petition filed by the father seeking custody, the court ruled that the marriage was valid under “Muhammadan law” and that the husband held lawful guardianship.Protests and backlashThe judgment triggered widespread reaction on social media, along with protests, press conferences, and conventions across the country. At least three Catholic bishops, along with the PCBC, issued statements urging authorities to review the ruling.The backlash prompted government engagement with the concerns of the country’s Christian minority, estimated at 1.37% (3.28 million people).Addressing an interfaith Easter gathering in Lahore, Tarar assured Christian leaders of his support, saying the committee’s recommendations would be submitted to the Ministry of Law and Justice within a week. Archbishop Azad Marshall, moderator/president bishop of the Church of Pakistan, a united Protestant denomination, meets with ecumenical leaders and Christian politicians following an April 6, 2026, consultation on the Maria Shahbaz case at Waris Road, Lahore. | Credit: Church of Pakistan Legal dimensionsMeanwhile, Punjab Minister for Minorities Affairs Ramesh Singh Arora said his department was forming a parallel committee to examine the legal dimensions of the case.Mary James Gill, a Christian lawyer, former lawmaker, and executive director of the Center for Law and Justice who serves on the committee, welcomed the move as a “genuine concern to find a way forward.”“It is highly encouraging that a state representative personally took up the issue. However, we are still in a consultative process,” she told EWTN News, noting shortcomings in both the lower courts and within the affected community.“The petition was filed under Section 491 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which pertains to habeas corpus, and not to determining the exact age of the girl — a question that remains disputed,” Gill said.“Regrettably, no such verification was carried out in the lower courts. In cases where documentation is ambiguous, magistrates and sessions judges tend to rely on in-person statements, consent, and their own observations.”She noted that the Christian Marriage Act of 1872 governs the solemnization of marriages involving one or more Christians.“Similarly, the personal laws of both Christianity and Islam in Pakistan remain silent on the age of conversion. Church leaders need to revisit and update these frameworks. At the same time, parents must place greater emphasis on the ideological and moral formation of their children,” she added.In an April 6 letter to the law ministry, Anthony Naveed, deputy speaker of the Sindh Assembly, urged the federal government to address “serious legal gaps” exposed by the ruling and called for uniform amendments aligning provincial laws with Balochistan’s legislation, which explicitly invalidates child marriages.A pattern of abuseFor decades, rights advocates have called for stronger legal and administrative measures to prevent the abduction and forced religious conversion of girls from minority communities.At least 515 cases of abduction and forced conversion of minority girls and women were reported between 2021 and 2025, according to the Center for Social Justice. Hindu girls accounted for 69% (353 cases), followed by Christian girls at 31% (160 cases). Most victims were under 18, with cases concentrated in Sindh and Punjab.Shukardin said courts in the Muslim-majority country are not consistently applying laws prohibiting marriage under 18.“The Church is not in favor of marriages involving conversion under such circumstances. We demand safety for our daughters and will continue to raise our voice for underage brides of any religion,” he said.

unitedyam

Bishop Samson Shukardin said government committees are often delayed so people forget, as protests continue over the marriage of 13-year-old Maria Shahbaz.

Read More