The Politics of Three Cardinals

Just a week after Archbishop Coakley, the new president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), met with President Trump, Vice President Vance, Secretary Rubio, and Secretary Noem, three U.S. cardinals ignored Archbishop Coakley’s elected authority and issued a statement harshly critical of the Trump administration.

And this in the wake of a very significant win that is fair to credit to Archbishop Coakley’s engagement with the administration: the new regulation that allows religious workers (priests) to remain in the country without having to return home for a minimum of a year, thereby permanently removing many priests from service in the United States.

The hubris of Cardinals Cupich, McElroy, and Tobin cannot be overstated—first with respect to process and second with respect to substance.

With respect to process, it is the president of the USCCB, Archbishop Coakley, who has been entrusted by his fellow bishops to speak on behalf of the U.S. bishops and engage the federal government. It is not the job of three Cardinals who cannot get elected to any positions within the USCCB to appoint themselves as the moral voice speaking on behalf of their brother bishops, which is what the cardinals’ statement tries to communicate.

This is a further breakdown in the collegial unity that is so important to the Holy Father. The narrative from Rome under Pope Francis was that the U.S. bishops are deeply divided. This simply is not the case. The bishops of the U.S. are largely united, but there are a small handful of rogue cardinals and bishops, certainly less than ten percent of the USCCB, who are willing to create division.

Hopefully, Pope Leo understands that the division that does exist is the result of a small group of bishops who do not respect their brother bishops enough to work through the formal channels of the USCCB. It is the USCCB that has the institutional responsibility to work on behalf of the roughly 250 U.S. bishops in a unified and deliberate way.

The action of these cardinals ignores the canonical authority of the USCCB and treats it more as a voluntary organization that can be ignored or bypassed at will. It’s impossible to ignore the sense of self-importance involved. The harm done to Archbishop Coakley’s engagement with the Trump administration is unknown but is likely significant. We can imagine President Trump and his officers wanting nothing to do with the USCCB when cardinals go off and undermine internal negotiations based on efforts to engage in good dialogue and build goodwill.

To be clear: this is not to say the USCCB should not criticize the administration for various actions. It does and will no doubt continue to do so. But the criticism should be within the context of a wider environment that the three Cardinals’ statement ignores.

The three cardinals have no claim to speak on behalf of the Church in the United States. And yet they cannot help themselves. They are the source of division.

With respect to substance, it is reasonable to criticize the Trump administration on various issues, including the rattling of sabers regarding Greenland, the abortion drug, and the use of force by ICE.

What this statement does not do, however, is recognize the many good things the administration has done, which are real and significant, or the nuance of these international situations. President Trump helped end the war in Gaza. He is working toward a multi-national solution in Ukraine, more so than his predecessor. There are other wars he has helped end.

One wonders, as well, what the Venezuelan bishops think about the U.S. interdiction? We know what the Venezuelan people think. President Trump has been clear that he plans to help Venezuela transition to a government of self-rule, something that certainly was not the case under Maduro. Perhaps we should take the judgment of Maduro’s opposition leader, Maria Corina Machado, who gave her Nobel Peace Prize to Trump as a sign of gratitude, as a guide.

The good done by President Trump’s action has saved millions of people from tyrannical rule, stemmed the flow of families having to leave their homeland, and provided a path to much-needed stability in the region. None of that is remotely acknowledged in the Cardinals’ statement.

Yes, the question of international law can and should be discussed. But it is not so black and white as the cardinals imply. Where was the outrage over Maduro’s violation of domestic and international law? The cardinals end up sounding like the partisan voices so prevalent on social media and cable news.

We should not overlook that these same Cardinals were silent when President Biden did everything in his power to expand abortion and support “gay marriage”. They were silent when the Little Sisters of the Poor were again dragged into court.

They were silent when the previous administration permitted numerous violent criminals to enter our country and commit horrific crimes, including murder and rape.

They were silent when the borders were opened for the flow of deadly drugs that killed thousands of young people.

They were silent when peaceful pro-life protestors were arrested.

All of this and more profoundly undermines their credibility now. It is as if they see things through a partisan lens rather than a Catholic one.