schedule – United Yam

Catholic doctors and ethicists react to CDC’s revised childhood vaccine schedule #Catholic

Credit: CDC/Debora Cartagena

Jan 12, 2026 / 06:00 am (CNA).
Catholic medical professionals and ethicists had mixed reactions to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) announcement last week that it has revised the recommended childhood and adolescent vaccine schedule.In a press release on Jan. 5, the CDC announced a revised recommended childhood immunization schedule, which reduces the number of universally recommended vaccines from 18 to 11. It retains routine recommendations for all children against measles, mumps, rubella, polio, pertussis, tetanus, diphtheria, Haemophilus influenzae type b, pneumococcal disease, human papillomavirus (HPV), and varicella (chickenpox).Vaccines for rotavirus, influenza, COVID-19, hepatitis A, hepatitis B, meningococcal disease, and RSV now shift to recommendations for high-risk groups or after “shared clinical decision-making” between providers and families.According to a Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) memo, the CDC “applies shared clinical decision-making recommendations when evidence indicates that individuals may benefit from vaccination based on an analysis of the individual’s characteristics, values, and preferences, the provider’s medical judgment, and the characteristics of the vaccine being considered.”Insurance companies must continue to cover all vaccines.The changes come after President Donald Trump directed the heads of the CDC and HHS in December 2025 to “review best practices from peer, developed nations regarding childhood vaccination recommendations and the scientific evidence underlying those practices” and to make changes accordingly.After reviewing the vaccination practices of 20 peer nations, a scientific assessment found that “the U.S. is a global outlier among developed nations in both the number of diseases addressed in its routine childhood vaccination schedule and the total number of recommended doses but does not have higher vaccination rates than such countries.”“Science demands continuous evaluation,” Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), said in the CDC press release. “This decision commits NIH, CDC, and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to gold standard science, greater transparency, and ongoing reassessment as new data emerge.”Dr. Tim Millea, chair of the health care policy committee at the Catholic Medical Association (CMA), welcomed the changes, telling CNA that he thought the CDC approached the revisions “in a very logical way.”“There has been a huge drop in trust surrounding vaccines since the COVID-19 pandemic,” Millea said. “The suggestions during COVID that the science was ‘settled’ rubbed a lot of us the wrong way.”“The loudest critics of these new recommendations say this is ideology over science,” he said. “Science is a process, not an end. If we need more evidence, let’s get it,” he said, pointing out Bhattacharya’s call for “gold standard” science and “ongoing reassessment.”Millea, a retired orthopedic surgeon, said he has confidence that Bhattacharya and Dr. Marty Makary, head of the FDA, are “not going to let ideology get ahead of science.”The president of the National Catholic Bioethics Center (NCBC), John Di Camillo, told CNA in a statement regarding the updated immunization recommendations: “The people look to public health authorities precisely for this kind of guidance, which is responsive to continually evolving research, ongoing discussions among professionals in the medical field, and ethical principles that promote the common good, respect the dignity of the human person, and limit the interference of financial and ideological conflicts.”‘Let those closest to the children make the decisions’Millea acknowledged that critics of the CDC’s revised recommendations say comparing the U.S. vaccine schedule to that of much smaller, more homogeneous nations such as Denmark is like “comparing apples to oranges.”However, he pointed out that the CDC’s revised schedule is simply a recommendation, and each of the 50 U.S. states is free to do what it deems best. “It’s like 50 laboratories. Let’s see what works the best.”Invoking the Catholic principle of subsidiarity, Millea said “let those closest to the children who are getting the vaccinations make the decisions.”“One of the positive aspects of the pandemic is that now we can take a step back and we’re questioning, not because something may be wrong, but maybe because it could be improved upon,” Millea said.John F. Brehany, executive vice president and director of Institutional Relations at the NCBC, told CNA that “the new schedule appears to have been designed with good intent; that is, … to have gained public trust in the absence of mandates and to have contributed to population health outcomes that meet or exceed those of the U.S.”“The new schedule does not take a ‘one size fits all’ approach but rather structures recommendations based on the nature of the diseases, vaccines in question, and characteristics of the children or patients who may receive them,” he continued. “This approach appears to be well-founded and to provide a sound foundation for respecting the dignity and rights of every unique human person.”This will ‘sow more confusion’Dr. Gwyneth Spaeder, a Catholic pediatrician in North Carolina, did not welcome the changes to the immunization schedule.While she acknowledged that the damage to trust in institutions was substantial after the COVID-19 pandemic, she thinks the issues surrounding the COVID-19 vaccine’s safety and efficacy “cannot be compared” with the decades of studies demonstrating the safety of common children’s immunizations.“It is not the same moral calculus,” she said.She does not believe revising the immunization schedule this way will restore trust in institutions, which she said might take “years or even generations” to rebuild.This method will “sow more confusion,” Spaeder said. “Instead of trying to rebuild trust in transparent, evidence-based practices, we have created a situation where everyone is told different things … For this child, we think this schedule is the best, for that child, there’s a different one. That’s not how public health works.”She also said that comparing the homogeneous, relatively tiny population of 6 million in Denmark to that of the diverse population of 340 million in the U.S. is “a false comparison.”“Their children are at less risk from falling through the cracks and contracting these diseases we try to vaccinate against,” she said, noting the protective public health effects of Denmark’s universal health care and generous parental leave policies.“The children who will be most harmed in the U.S. are the underserved,” Spaeder said. “That’s being lost in this conversation. We can have a lot of high-level political arguments, but I am most concerned about my patients from single-parent homes who attend day care from young ages, or who are born to mothers who don’t have adequate prenatal care.”“They will lose out the most from not being protected from these diseases.”

unitedyam January 12, 2026

Credit: CDC/Debora Cartagena

Jan 12, 2026 / 06:00 am (CNA).

Catholic medical professionals and ethicists had mixed reactions to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) announcement last week that it has revised the recommended childhood and adolescent vaccine schedule.

In a press release on Jan. 5, the CDC announced a revised recommended childhood immunization schedule, which reduces the number of universally recommended vaccines from 18 to 11. It retains routine recommendations for all children against measles, mumps, rubella, polio, pertussis, tetanus, diphtheria, Haemophilus influenzae type b, pneumococcal disease, human papillomavirus (HPV), and varicella (chickenpox).

Vaccines for rotavirus, influenza, COVID-19, hepatitis A, hepatitis B, meningococcal disease, and RSV now shift to recommendations for high-risk groups or after “shared clinical decision-making” between providers and families.

According to a Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) memo, the CDC “applies shared clinical decision-making recommendations when evidence indicates that individuals may benefit from vaccination based on an analysis of the individual’s characteristics, values, and preferences, the provider’s medical judgment, and the characteristics of the vaccine being considered.”

Insurance companies must continue to cover all vaccines.

The changes come after President Donald Trump directed the heads of the CDC and HHS in December 2025 to “review best practices from peer, developed nations regarding childhood vaccination recommendations and the scientific evidence underlying those practices” and to make changes accordingly.

After reviewing the vaccination practices of 20 peer nations, a scientific assessment found that “the U.S. is a global outlier among developed nations in both the number of diseases addressed in its routine childhood vaccination schedule and the total number of recommended doses but does not have higher vaccination rates than such countries.”

“Science demands continuous evaluation,” Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), said in the CDC press release. “This decision commits NIH, CDC, and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to gold standard science, greater transparency, and ongoing reassessment as new data emerge.”

Dr. Tim Millea, chair of the health care policy committee at the Catholic Medical Association (CMA), welcomed the changes, telling CNA that he thought the CDC approached the revisions “in a very logical way.”

“There has been a huge drop in trust surrounding vaccines since the COVID-19 pandemic,” Millea said. “The suggestions during COVID that the science was ‘settled’ rubbed a lot of us the wrong way.”

“The loudest critics of these new recommendations say this is ideology over science,” he said. “Science is a process, not an end. If we need more evidence, let’s get it,” he said, pointing out Bhattacharya’s call for “gold standard” science and “ongoing reassessment.”

Millea, a retired orthopedic surgeon, said he has confidence that Bhattacharya and Dr. Marty Makary, head of the FDA, are “not going to let ideology get ahead of science.”

The president of the National Catholic Bioethics Center (NCBC), John Di Camillo, told CNA in a statement regarding the updated immunization recommendations: “The people look to public health authorities precisely for this kind of guidance, which is responsive to continually evolving research, ongoing discussions among professionals in the medical field, and ethical principles that promote the common good, respect the dignity of the human person, and limit the interference of financial and ideological conflicts.”

‘Let those closest to the children make the decisions’

Millea acknowledged that critics of the CDC’s revised recommendations say comparing the U.S. vaccine schedule to that of much smaller, more homogeneous nations such as Denmark is like “comparing apples to oranges.”

However, he pointed out that the CDC’s revised schedule is simply a recommendation, and each of the 50 U.S. states is free to do what it deems best. “It’s like 50 laboratories. Let’s see what works the best.”

Invoking the Catholic principle of subsidiarity, Millea said “let those closest to the children who are getting the vaccinations make the decisions.”

“One of the positive aspects of the pandemic is that now we can take a step back and we’re questioning, not because something may be wrong, but maybe because it could be improved upon,” Millea said.

John F. Brehany, executive vice president and director of Institutional Relations at the NCBC, told CNA that “the new schedule appears to have been designed with good intent; that is, … to have gained public trust in the absence of mandates and to have contributed to population health outcomes that meet or exceed those of the U.S.”

“The new schedule does not take a ‘one size fits all’ approach but rather structures recommendations based on the nature of the diseases, vaccines in question, and characteristics of the children or patients who may receive them,” he continued. “This approach appears to be well-founded and to provide a sound foundation for respecting the dignity and rights of every unique human person.”

This will ‘sow more confusion’

Dr. Gwyneth Spaeder, a Catholic pediatrician in North Carolina, did not welcome the changes to the immunization schedule.

While she acknowledged that the damage to trust in institutions was substantial after the COVID-19 pandemic, she thinks the issues surrounding the COVID-19 vaccine’s safety and efficacy “cannot be compared” with the decades of studies demonstrating the safety of common children’s immunizations.

“It is not the same moral calculus,” she said.

She does not believe revising the immunization schedule this way will restore trust in institutions, which she said might take “years or even generations” to rebuild.

This method will “sow more confusion,” Spaeder said. “Instead of trying to rebuild trust in transparent, evidence-based practices, we have created a situation where everyone is told different things … For this child, we think this schedule is the best, for that child, there’s a different one. That’s not how public health works.”

She also said that comparing the homogeneous, relatively tiny population of 6 million in Denmark to that of the diverse population of 340 million in the U.S. is “a false comparison.”

“Their children are at less risk from falling through the cracks and contracting these diseases we try to vaccinate against,” she said, noting the protective public health effects of Denmark’s universal health care and generous parental leave policies.

“The children who will be most harmed in the U.S. are the underserved,” Spaeder said. “That’s being lost in this conversation. We can have a lot of high-level political arguments, but I am most concerned about my patients from single-parent homes who attend day care from young ages, or who are born to mothers who don’t have adequate prenatal care.”

“They will lose out the most from not being protected from these diseases.”

$At annual meeting, Catholic historians assess impact of first American pope #Catholic University of Notre Dame professor Kathleen Sprows Cummings. Credit: Ken Oliver-Méndez/CNA Jan 10, 2026 / 10:12 am (CNA). Assessing the impact of the Catholic Church's first American pope was front and center at the 106th annual meeting of the American Catholic Historical Association (ACHA), which met in Pope Leo XIV's hometown of Chicago from Jan. 8-11.During a panel on the subject, Catholic scholars noted some of the historic caricatures of what an American papacy would be like and compared that to the first eight months of Leo's actual papacy.American Catholic History Association panelists (from left to right) Brian Flanagan, Colleen Dulle, Miguel Diaz and Kathleen Sprows Cummings. Credit: Ken Oliver-Méndez/CNAAt the outset of the panel, University of Notre Dame history professor Kathleen Sprows Cummings referenced the 1894 Puck magazine cartoon titled “ The American Pope,” which depicts the first apostolic delegate to the United States, Cardinal Francesco Satolli, sitting atop a church labeled the “American headquarters” and casting a shadow of then Pope Leo XIII over the entire country.Sprows Cummings noted the cartoon illustrates “fears about papal intervention in the United States” at a time when the country was receiving waves of Catholic immigrants from countries such as Ireland and Italy.As Catholics became more settled in American society in the subsequent decades, she said some of those prejudices began to lessen and pointed to the 1918 election of Catholic Democrat Al Smith as New York’s governor. By this point, Catholics had become “much more confident about their place in American culture.” During the same early 20th century period, the United States also began to rise as a superpower. Sprows Cummings noted that predominant concerns about an American pope shifted to Vatican concerns over the “Americanization of the Catholic Church.”America magazine's Vatican correspondent, Colleen Dulle, said some of those concerns were evidently mitigated in the person of then Cardinal Robert Prevost, whose service to the Church included many years as a missionary and bishop in Peru as well as in Rome as the head of a global religious order, the Augustinians.Sprows Cummings said the College of Cardinals clearly saw in Cardinal Prevost the "pastoral presence, administrative savvy and global vision" that the Church needed at this time and that he was “not elected in some flex of American power.”Miguel Diaz, the John Courtney Murray, S.J. Chair in Public Service at Loyola University Chicago, noted that some of Leo’s actions have actually amounted to the opposite of flexing American power, such as his focus on the dignity of migrants, which he contrasted to the policies of the Trump administration.Former U.S. Ambassador to the Holy See Miguel Diaz. Credit: Ken Oliver-Méndez/CNADiaz, who served as U.S. ambassador to the Holy See under former President Barack Obama, said Leo is “a different symbol, from America first to America cares.”He emphasized that having an American pope is significant amid the country’s political debates because “he can say things and he will be listened to.”The panelists also discussed what Leo’s papacy may look like moving forward, with Dulle noting that only this year are there clear signs of him charting his own programmatic course, as the events and itinerary of the 2025 Jubilee were primarily developed for Pope Francis. Up until now, she said, he has been mostly “continuing the Francis initiatives in a different style.”She noted Pope Leo's management of this week's consistory — a meeting between the pope and the College of Cardinals — where the pontiff gave them four topics to choose from, which were all in line with Francis’s priorities: synodality, evangelization, reform of the curia, and the liturgy. The cardinals chose synodality and evangelization.Dulle said Leo is seen as "a consensus builder” who aims to build consensus around the Church's priorities. She noted Pope Leo's announcement this week of a regular schedule of consistories, with the next one set for this June. This approach is emerging as a "hallmark of how he governs the Church" Dulle said.Brian Flanagan, the John Cardinal Cody Chair of Catholic Theology at Loyola University Chicago, also emphasized Leo’s strong appeal to the cardinals and bishops in efforts to reach consensus, in keeping with the Pope's role as a preserver of unity.Flanagan said he sees Leo exercising the papacy as not so much "at the top of the pyramid, but as at the center of conversation.” He said this is likely influenced by Leo's past as leader of a religious order — the Order of Saint Augustine — rather than a diocese because the orders are “global, diverse, and somewhat fractious.”“You can’t govern a global religious community without getting people on board,” he said.$

unitedyam January 10, 2026

University of Notre Dame professor Kathleen Sprows Cummings. Credit: Ken Oliver-Méndez/CNA

Jan 10, 2026 / 10:12 am (CNA).

Assessing the impact of the Catholic Church's first American pope was front and center at the 106th annual meeting of the American Catholic Historical Association (ACHA), which met in Pope Leo XIV's hometown of Chicago from Jan. 8-11.

During a panel on the subject, Catholic scholars noted some of the historic caricatures of what an American papacy would be like and compared that to the first eight months of Leo's actual papacy.

American Catholic History Association panelists (from left to right) Brian Flanagan, Colleen Dulle, Miguel Diaz and Kathleen Sprows Cummings. Credit: Ken Oliver-Méndez/CNA

At the outset of the panel, University of Notre Dame history professor Kathleen Sprows Cummings referenced the 1894 Puck magazine cartoon titled “ The American Pope,” which depicts the first apostolic delegate to the United States, Cardinal Francesco Satolli, sitting atop a church labeled the “American headquarters” and casting a shadow of then Pope Leo XIII over the entire country.

Sprows Cummings noted the cartoon illustrates “fears about papal intervention in the United States” at a time when the country was receiving waves of Catholic immigrants from countries such as Ireland and Italy.

As Catholics became more settled in American society in the subsequent decades, she said some of those prejudices began to lessen and pointed to the 1918 election of Catholic Democrat Al Smith as New York’s governor. By this point, Catholics had become “much more confident about their place in American culture.”

During the same early 20th century period, the United States also began to rise as a superpower. Sprows Cummings noted that predominant concerns about an American pope shifted to Vatican concerns over the “Americanization of the Catholic Church.”

America magazine's Vatican correspondent, Colleen Dulle, said some of those concerns were evidently mitigated in the person of then Cardinal Robert Prevost, whose service to the Church included many years as a missionary and bishop in Peru as well as in Rome as the head of a global religious order, the Augustinians.

Sprows Cummings said the College of Cardinals clearly saw in Cardinal Prevost the "pastoral presence, administrative savvy and global vision" that the Church needed at this time and that he was “not elected in some flex of American power.”

Miguel Diaz, the John Courtney Murray, S.J. Chair in Public Service at Loyola University Chicago, noted that some of Leo’s actions have actually amounted to the opposite of flexing American power, such as his focus on the dignity of migrants, which he contrasted to the policies of the Trump administration.

Former U.S. Ambassador to the Holy See Miguel Diaz. Credit: Ken Oliver-Méndez/CNA

Diaz, who served as U.S. ambassador to the Holy See under former President Barack Obama, said Leo is “a different symbol, from America first to America cares.”

He emphasized that having an American pope is significant amid the country’s political debates because “he can say things and he will be listened to.”

The panelists also discussed what Leo’s papacy may look like moving forward, with Dulle noting that only this year are there clear signs of him charting his own programmatic course, as the events and itinerary of the 2025 Jubilee were primarily developed for Pope Francis.

Up until now, she said, he has been mostly “continuing the Francis initiatives in a different style.”

She noted Pope Leo's management of this week's consistory — a meeting between the pope and the College of Cardinals — where the pontiff gave them four topics to choose from, which were all in line with Francis’s priorities: synodality, evangelization, reform of the curia, and the liturgy. The cardinals chose synodality and evangelization.

Dulle said Leo is seen as "a consensus builder” who aims to build consensus around the Church's priorities. She noted Pope Leo's announcement this week of a regular schedule of consistories, with the next one set for this June. This approach is emerging as a "hallmark of how he governs the Church" Dulle said.

Brian Flanagan, the John Cardinal Cody Chair of Catholic Theology at Loyola University Chicago, also emphasized Leo’s strong appeal to the cardinals and bishops in efforts to reach consensus, in keeping with the Pope's role as a preserver of unity.

Flanagan said he sees Leo exercising the papacy as not so much "at the top of the pyramid, but as at the center of conversation.” He said this is likely influenced by Leo's past as leader of a religious order — the Order of Saint Augustine — rather than a diocese because the orders are “global, diverse, and somewhat fractious.”

“You can’t govern a global religious community without getting people on board,” he said.

Trump eases marijuana regulations amid industry backing, Catholic concerns #Catholic

President Donald Trump signed an executive order Dec. 18, 2025, that eases federal marijuana regulations amid support from the cannabis industry but opposition from some Catholic and conservative groups. / Credit: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Dec 18, 2025 / 17:18 pm (CNA).
President Donald Trump on Thursday signed an executive order to ease federal marijuana regulations amid support from the cannabis industry but opposition from some Catholic and conservative groups.Trump’s Dec. 18 executive order directs the attorney general to reclassify marijuana from a Schedule I drug to a Schedule III drug as quickly as federal law allows. This process began under President Joe Biden’s administration and is being continued under Trump.Schedule I, which includes marijuana, is reserved for drugs that have “no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse,” according to the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA). Schedule III is a lower classification, which is for drugs “with a moderate to low potential for physical and psychological dependence” and less abuse potential than Schedule I.Rescheduling marijuana does not end a federal ban on both recreational and medical use, which would still be in place. However, it would reduce criminal penalties, open the door for medical research, and potentially be a step toward further deregulation and normalization.Right now, 40 states have medical marijuana programs and 24 legalize recreational use, in contrast to the federal law.In a news conference, Trump said rescheduling marijuana will help patients who seek the drug for medical use “live a far better life.” He said the executive order “in no way sanctions its use as a recreational drug.”“Young Americans are especially at risk, so unless a drug is recommended by a doctor for medical reasons, just don’t do it,” the president said.“At the same time, the facts compel the federal government to recognize that marijuana can be legitimate in terms of medical applications when carefully administered,” he said. “In some cases, this may include the use as a substitute for addictive and potentially lethal opioid painkillers.”Kelsey Reinhardt, president and CEO of CatholicVote, criticized the decision. The group had launched a campaign to discourage the president from rescheduling the product. “Every argument pushed by the cannabis lobby has now been exposed as false by real-world data and medical science,” Reinhardt said in a statement.“We were told marijuana was safe, nonaddictive, and would reduce crime — none of that turned out to be true in my home state of Colorado or in other states that are now working to repeal,” she said. “Instead, we’re seeing higher addiction rates, emergency-room spikes, impaired driving, heart risks, mental-health damage, and lasting harm to young people,” Reinhardt said.Reinhardt called the executive order “disappointing” and said it “repeats the same reckless mistakes we made with Big Tobacco and puts ideology ahead of public health.” She said CatholicVote will work with federal agencies to “minimize the damage” and urged Congress to take action to reverse the executive order. The Catechism of the Catholic Church does not directly mention marijuana but teaches “the use of drugs inflicts very grave damage on human health and life.” It calls drug use a “grave offense” with the exception of drugs used on “strictly therapeutic grounds,” such as medical treatment.In spite of concerns from some Catholics, some Catholic hospitals have done research into medical marijuana. Some of that research has looked into medical marijuana as potentially a less risky and less addictive alternative to opioids for pain management.The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops has not taken a position on the matter. Pope Francis said he opposed the partial legalization of so-called “soft drugs,” stating in 2014 that “the problem of drug use is not solved with drugs.” In June, Pope Leo XIV referred to drugs as “an invisible prison” and encouraged law enforcement to focus on drug traffickers instead of addicts.

unitedyam December 18, 2025

President Donald Trump signed an executive order Dec. 18, 2025, that eases federal marijuana regulations amid support from the cannabis industry but opposition from some Catholic and conservative groups. / Credit: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Dec 18, 2025 / 17:18 pm (CNA).

President Donald Trump on Thursday signed an executive order to ease federal marijuana regulations amid support from the cannabis industry but opposition from some Catholic and conservative groups.

Trump’s Dec. 18 executive order directs the attorney general to reclassify marijuana from a Schedule I drug to a Schedule III drug as quickly as federal law allows. This process began under President Joe Biden’s administration and is being continued under Trump.

Schedule I, which includes marijuana, is reserved for drugs that have “no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse,” according to the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA). Schedule III is a lower classification, which is for drugs “with a moderate to low potential for physical and psychological dependence” and less abuse potential than Schedule I.

Rescheduling marijuana does not end a federal ban on both recreational and medical use, which would still be in place. However, it would reduce criminal penalties, open the door for medical research, and potentially be a step toward further deregulation and normalization.

Right now, 40 states have medical marijuana programs and 24 legalize recreational use, in contrast to the federal law.

In a news conference, Trump said rescheduling marijuana will help patients who seek the drug for medical use “live a far better life.” He said the executive order “in no way sanctions its use as a recreational drug.”

“Young Americans are especially at risk, so unless a drug is recommended by a doctor for medical reasons, just don’t do it,” the president said.

“At the same time, the facts compel the federal government to recognize that marijuana can be legitimate in terms of medical applications when carefully administered,” he said. “In some cases, this may include the use as a substitute for addictive and potentially lethal opioid painkillers.”

Kelsey Reinhardt, president and CEO of CatholicVote, criticized the decision. The group had launched a campaign to discourage the president from rescheduling the product.

“Every argument pushed by the cannabis lobby has now been exposed as false by real-world data and medical science,” Reinhardt said in a statement.

“We were told marijuana was safe, nonaddictive, and would reduce crime — none of that turned out to be true in my home state of Colorado or in other states that are now working to repeal,” she said. “Instead, we’re seeing higher addiction rates, emergency-room spikes, impaired driving, heart risks, mental-health damage, and lasting harm to young people,” Reinhardt said.

Reinhardt called the executive order “disappointing” and said it “repeats the same reckless mistakes we made with Big Tobacco and puts ideology ahead of public health.” She said CatholicVote will work with federal agencies to “minimize the damage” and urged Congress to take action to reverse the executive order.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church does not directly mention marijuana but teaches “the use of drugs inflicts very grave damage on human health and life.” It calls drug use a “grave offense” with the exception of drugs used on “strictly therapeutic grounds,” such as medical treatment.

In spite of concerns from some Catholics, some Catholic hospitals have done research into medical marijuana. Some of that research has looked into medical marijuana as potentially a less risky and less addictive alternative to opioids for pain management.

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops has not taken a position on the matter. Pope Francis said he opposed the partial legalization of so-called “soft drugs,” stating in 2014 that “the problem of drug use is not solved with drugs.” In June, Pope Leo XIV referred to drugs as “an invisible prison” and encouraged law enforcement to focus on drug traffickers instead of addicts.