By
Jan 14, 2026 / 06:00 am (CNA).
Greenlandic Catholics are reportedly expressing opposition to United States plans to acquire the territory, while Nordic Catholic leaders are waiting to see how the situation develops amid potential U.S. military intervention.
U.S. President Donald Trump has signaled repeatedly that he wants the U.S. to annex Greenland in some form, with White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt describing the matter as a “national security priority.”
Utilizing the military to that end “is always an option,” Leavitt said on Jan. 6.
The apparent threat of military action on Greenland touched off a global controversy, with U.S. advocates praising the White House’s ambitions and critics decrying it as an aggressive power move.
Trump on Jan. 11 indicated again that the effort was motivated by security concerns. “If we don’t [acquire Greenland], Russia or China will, and that’s not going to happen when I‘m president,” he told reporters on Air Force One.
‘Too early to make any definitive statements’
A sparsely populated landmass home to about 55,000 permanent residents, Greenland is among the least Catholic territories in the West, with the vast majority of Greenlanders belonging to the Lutheran church.
Catholics in the area are served by the Diocese of Copenhagen, located approximately 2,000 miles east of Nuuk, the most populous city on the island. Though mostly self-administered, the region falls under the authority of the Kingdom of Denmark.
Sister Anna Mirijam Kaschner, CPS, the secretary-general of the Nordic Bishops‘ Conference, told CNA that the bishops — who serve Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Finland, and Iceland — will be holding a plenary meeting in March.
“By then we expect to have a clearer understanding of the situation,” she said. “It is very likely that the matter will be discussed at that time.”
It is “too early to make any definitive statements,” Kaschner said, though she added that there is some consternation already among Greenland’s small Catholic population, which is almost entirely concentrated in a single parish, Christ the King Church in Nuuk.
“Parishioners in Greenland have expressed concern about the situation involving the United States,” she said. “According to the parish priest, many have said that Greenland is their land, their country, and their home, and that they do not wish to become Americans.”
That sentiment has been echoed by political leaders in Greenland, a territory that has developed a distinct identity quite apart from its North American geography and its European administration.
A Jan. 9 joint statement from the country’s major political parties said bluntly: “We do not want to be Americans, we do not want to be Danes — we want to be Greenlanders.”
“The future of our country is for the Greenlandic people themselves to decide,” the leaders said, vowing to “independently decide what our country’s future should look like — without pressure, without delays, and without interference from others.”
The territory’s leaders have considerable latitude for self-governance, particularly after a self-rule law in 2009 established local control of the legal system and law enforcement, among other jurisdictions. Greenland is also permitted to seek full independence from Denmark if its people desire to do so.
With Catholic representation on the island sparse, the Church’s role in any future deliberation may be limited. Still, Kaschner said, Church leaders in Europe may develop a stance on the issue in the near future.
“Generally, Catholic leaders in the Nordic countries handle issues like this with caution, stressing respect for local people, existing sovereignty, and the dignity of affected communities,” she said.
Ahead of a clearer picture of the international dispute, she said, “there’s no single official stance beyond a focus on the well-being and wishes of Greenland’s people.”
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
An example of our president glaring overreach based more on personal aggrandization than strategic necessity. An indication, his emblazoning his name on any and every public, government historical institution he can. Naming classes of warships in his name, wrecking a marvelous turn around in American culture now bent on destroying what he accomplished.
What next? Should we invade Canada to ensure our strategic dominance, declare the Arctic a US protectorate? All his cabinet members, advisors are deathly fearful of contradicting him, except the one woman Chief of Staff Susie Wiles who is aware of his emotional disorder calling it an alcoholic personality of self perceived limitless ability. Pray this president gets hold of his wits and modifies a vision of strategic advance that is nothing less than imperialism.
About the “an alcoholic personality of self-perceived limitless ability,” might it apply equally (equality!) to Trump, Putin, Xi Jinping, and the ghost of Muhammad, but in different flavors? Are we witnessing the shelf-life of “Westphalia” (1648) as the model de jour for international relations, as further developed with the rules established following World War II?
Today, a multi-lateral reversion back to “spheres of influence” such that positioning in the Arctic does matter—just as the Mediterranean at one time was a lake withing the domain of Islam.
Today, alongside multi-lateral/conflicting and bombastic narcissisms, we at least can be encouraged that Europe is being weaned into a more robust adulthood of self-defense. But one searches in vain for the statesmanship and institution-building seen in the post-War mid-20th Century. But, surely, we should not be tempted to look back with weird nostalgia to the bi-polar simplicity of the Iron Curtain and the Soviet Empire.
So, about the historic place of true religion in all the above, the ex-communist Quaker Whittaker Chambers offered hope of a sort…
“It is idle to talk about the wreck of Western civilization. It is already a wreck from within. That is why we can hope to do little more now than snatch a fingernail of a saint from the rack or a handful of ashes from the faggots, and bury them secretly in a flowerpot against the day, ages hence, when a few men begin again to dare to believe that there was once something else, that something else is thinkable, and need some evidence of what it was, and the fortifying knowledge that there were those who, at the great nightfall, took loving thought to preserve the tokens of hope and truth.”
(Whittaker Chambers [author of “Witness,” Random House, 1952], in a letter of August 5, 1954, in his “Cold Friday”, Random House, 1964).
Well, Peter. I was going to add some humor regarding your list of the grandiose world leaders and say you forgot Jeff Bezos.
Events are dramatically unfolding. France, Germany, Britain have planned to send troops to defend Greenland. From whom? The U.S. Trump allegedly remarked when asked that he would consider attacking Greenland despite Nato troops on the ground. Of course I’m alarmed as to what will come of it.
Yes, well, there’s the historical precedent of Margaret Thatcher and the 1982 Falklands War with the deaths of 649 Argentine military personnel and 255 British. Also, today the entangled hotspots of Taiwan and eastern Ukraine.
Less analogous is the one day “war” of succession of Panama from Columbia in 1903, which was enabled by, but did not directly involve the imperialist President Theodore Roosevelt. Prior to the radically new realities of World War I and II.
It would be helpful if history had been taught at the so-called and now defunct Trump University.
What I stated above two days ago, ‘Pray this president gets hold of his wits and modifies a vision of strategic advance that is nothing less than imperialism’ – has begun to have repercussions, in this instance a dramatic change in historical alliance and a radical reordering of balance of power.
Canada has turned to China for a ‘strategic alliance’ and the start of a new world order. This has occurred because of earlier threatening overtures to absorb Canada, at least one of its provinces, and the present threat to take Greenland by force.
Now China is at our doorstep. Greenland seems inconsequential insofar as US security. Truly a disaster the result of overreach by a president who has achieved so much good, but seriously impeded by his own grandiosity. Will he now invade Canada? He must rein himself in and now renegotiate with Canada. If that’s feasible at this stage.
Why, pray tell, do you feel the need to post the same rant twice in two separate posts two days apart? Maybe that’s an issue related to your own compulsive grandiosity, as if you’re qualified to comment on such things.
Greenland geographically is a part of North America & the Arctic is critical to defense.
I can’t read Pres. Trump’s mind but this all reminds me of my fearless little dog, RIP, who would go completely couyon when strangers approached our vehicle. He was Donald Trump on 4 legs. No one wanting to keep all their fingers would attempt to put a hand on my truck. It could be embarrassing at times & I’d apologize for my crazy dog but inwardly I was very grateful for his aggressive behavior. It saved me the trouble. And he may have saved us from real harm.
It might work in a similar way for our NATO allies. Trump can act all couyon & confuse Putin/keep him at bay. While Western leaders disown that kind of behavior & have the luxury of looking more presidential & reasonable in comparison.
A little less hysteria please. If Canada is turning to China for a strategic alliance, something was rotten in Denmark (Canada) long before Trump made his feelings about Greenland known.
Canada, where they were arresting pastors left and right during covid for having the nerve to conduct worship services? Canada, where they took away truckers bank accounts and seized their vehicles? Trump wants Greenland precisely to PREVENT China from establishing a claim there. How do you imagine 30,000 people are going to fight billions from China? Or Russia for that matter, even in its weakened state? Simple answer—– they can’t. We dont want either communist country looming over our north border. Hence a need for the US to secure the location.
Surely you must be aware that the Chinese have put installations in antarctica and even recently landed vehicles on the moon with an eye toward establishing bases and claims. If you dont see this as territorial encroachment you are asleep at the switch. Greenland is closer than you might imagine, in a military sense. Invade Canada? They dont have anything we want, and like most Brit connected countries, recently seem to be cancelling freedom of speech along with freedom of religion( George Pell, euthanasia, pro-life arrests, covid imprisonments) . We are not interested in importing that morality free mindset.