1/3 I don’t share that fear. She’s an energetic, articulate communicator, likeable, and by all accounts an excellent manager. Her record reassures: she has sought to bring EWTN into the mainstream, and deplores the work-of-the-devil Arroyo show.
Perhaps this could be modeled by responding to the White House aide calling someone transgender for no reason. Feel free to show us an adult response, @FrMatthewLC
I told CNN today that Pope Leo XIV views Silicon Valley’s original sin as thinking they’re greater than God.
That’s why the first U.S.-born pontiff has called for a “disarmed” AI that cannot perpetrate war devoid of human conscience.
That’s why he wants to partner with Christopher Olah and @AntrophicAI, who courageously stood up to the Pentagon.
He wants to work together to build an AI that serves humanity.
I love these people who run propaganda for Republicans then pretend like they are impartial while being outraged that others point out things that are publicly known.
Chris Hale, "Mr. Catholic," is once again spreading vicious lies to achieve a political end.
Here's a feature I wrote on Rubio's religious journey a few years ago:
https://t.co/Qk7H7SPRFV
The President does not believe in Just War Theory. The war is obviously unjust, and the President doesn’t care. He believes might makes right. Instead of undermining the Church to help Trump, you could try being a good bishop.
There is a way past the absurd and deeply divisive “war” between the President and the Pope, which has been enthusiastically ginned up by the press. And it is indicated in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 2309 to be precise. After laying out the various criteria for determining a just war—proportionality, last resort, declaration by a competent authority, reasonable hope of success, etc.—the Catechism points out that “the evaluation of these conditions for moral legitimacy belongs to the prudential judgment of those who have responsibility for the common good.” The assumption is that the just war principles function, to use the technical term, as heuristic devices, designed to guide the practical decision-making of those civil authorities who have to adjudicate matters of war and peace.
The role of the Church, therefore, is to call for peace and to urge that any conflict be strictly circumscribed by the moral constraints of the just war criteria. But it is not the role of the Church to evaluate whether a particular war is just or unjust. That appraisal belongs to the civil authorities, who, one presumes, have requisite knowledge of conditions on the ground. So, is the war in question truly the last resort? Is there really a balance between the good to be attained and the destruction caused by the war? Are combatants and non-combatants being properly distinguished in the waging of the conflict? Do the belligerents have right intention? Is there a reasonable hope of success? The posing of those questions—indeed the insistence upon their moral relevance—belongs rightly to the Church, but the answering of them belongs to the civil authorities.
The Pope has said, on numerous occasions, that he is not a politician and that his role is not the determination of any nation's foreign policy. But he has just as clearly said that he will continue to speak for peace and for moral constraint. In making both of these claims, he is operating perfectly within the framework of paragraph 2309 of the Catechism. If we understand that the Pope and the President have qualitatively different roles to play in the determination of moral action in regard to war, we can, I hope, extricate ourselves from the completely unhelpful narrative of “Pope vs. President.”
It’s tough but you really can’t be a Christian if you don’t want to welcome the stranger. The faith can’t be relativized to make it more attractive to people who reject Christ’s teachings.
Seeing three Bishops publicly oppose the President’s immigration enforcement hits close to home.
I have a loved one I’ve been praying would enter the Catholic Church. On Sunday, they walked out of Mass when a letter from our local Bishop, echoing those same priorities, was read.
When Bishops go on national TV advocating clemency for those who’ve broken our laws, yet don’t show the same urgency for innocent preborn children who are exactly where they are supposed to be, it hardens hearts.
And it just set back someone I deeply love on their journey to the faith.
Talk to the young people who are converting to Catholicism, and you’ll quickly learn they’re converting despite Cardinals like these. Their influence among the laity exists only insofar as outlets like CBS are willing to prop them up. These three Cardinals often pursue anti-Catholic agendas by masquerading their aims with religious language, though it’s not hard to see through it. All three use human dignity as cover for supporting an open-borders agenda, ignoring the Americans whose human dignity is violated by mass migration. Cardinal Tobin welcomed the lawless and destructive immigration policies of the Biden administration, but now describes ICE as lawless for trying to return home those who entered our country illegally and has called for Congress to block ICE funding. Cardinal Cupich sought to award pro-abortion Senator Dick Durbin with a Lifetime Achievement Award, primarily for the Senator’s work in flooding America with illegal aliens. Cardinal McElroy is one of the most vocal Catholic clergy who all but rejects the Church’s teachings on human sexuality and encourages the “radical inclusion” of those living openly in sexual sin, rather than calling Catholics to repentance and ordering their lives in accord with God’s will. Fortunately, the liberal Catholicism they often espouse will be short lived. Numerous studies, including one from Catholic University in 2025, show that liberal priests are a dying breed.
The clergy are becoming conservative again, which is to say, they’re becoming Catholic again.
Question for Roman Catholics:
Should Roman Catholic soldiers obey the lawful military orders of President Trump even if the Pope doesn't believe the war is just?
Now you can see why America didn't have a Roman Catholic president for almost 200 years.
I am not trying to make my Catholic friends, who I love, angry with this statement. But this entire episode is starting to explain to me why so many Americans were concerned about a Catholic president for so long.
I have no interest in Rome trying to dictate American policy. And if it continues to loudly make its opinions heard on our foreign policy, I believe they’re going to find a lot of American Protestants feeling a lot less ecumenical than we have been in the more recent past.
Pete Hegseth should’ve allowed the Commemoration of the Lord’s Passion, which includes the distribution of the Holy Eucharist and the veneration of the cross of Jesus Christ, to occur, because it has occurred at the Pentagon at every Good Friday in modern history.
Why do MAGA evangelicals disdain the Catholic Church so much?
Catholics for Catholics, as opposed to Catholics for another Abrahamic faith which might be a smidge awkward for these particular Catholics right here to be for?
Dissenters who refuse to admit they are dissenters are the single most annoying group of Catholics. Just be honest. It’s so shameless. Others have the integrity and courage to admit that they disagree with the Church on a particular matter.
The lawyer who wrote this brief isn’t even Catholic. He’s a left-wing Baptist.
The U.S. Conference of Democrat Bishops couldn’t even get a Catholic to explain Catholic teaching.