In the fallout from President Trump’s Truth Social Post attacking Pope Leo XIV, defenders seem to be coalescing around a common theme: the Pope should stay in his lane. The idea is actually present within Mr. Trump’s post itself, but it is now being picked up by people like the Vice President who, in an interview with Fox News yesterday, said “I think it’s a good thing, actually, that the Pope is advocating for the things he cares about,” but “I certainly think that, in some cases, it would be best for the Vatican to stick to matters of morality, to stick to matters of what’s going on in the Catholic Church, and let the president of the United States stick to dictating American public policy.”
On the surface, this seems like a reasonable thing to say. It does, after all echo fundamental American ideals like the separation of Church and State (ironically, this very ideal was criticized by Mr. Trump’s Religious Liberty Commission yesterday). The problem is that, in a representative government, determining policy is not the sole prerogative of the president (in the case of the current war with Iran, that responsibility is intended to be reserved for Congress and not the president) and the responsibility for a nation’s policies extends to the people who elect the leaders who determine this policy.
Additionally, government actions are not distinct from moral and ethical issues. We all know this. Consider the issues of abortion and euthanasia. If the Church had “stayed in its lane” and let government leaders dictate policy issues, it would never have spoken out against these assaults on human dignity and life. These are clearly moral issues that are informed by Catholic faith and social teaching. The Church speaks to the morality of these issues and, in turn, the moral teachings shape our understanding of them as political policy issues. The same can be applied to a host of other issues — immigration, war, poverty, the environment, access to healthcare, education. This is as it should be in a country like the U.S. where we are free to practice and, therefore, be shaped and formed by our faith.
The current situation is further evidence of this. The main point of disagreement between Pope Leo and Mr. Trump has been that of war, yet in this context, Vice President Vance’s remarks do not make sense. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines moral issues as those that involve right and wrong. Surely, war and its high cost to human life and flourishing is a moral issue! Thus, in countries where citizens have a role in electing government officials who can wage war, understanding the Church’s teaching in this area is an important part of their formation as Catholic citizens.
There is a common error which might explain why Mr. Vance responded as he did. Among U.S. Catholics, there is a tendency to divide the teachings of the Church along the lines of intrinsic evils and prudential issues. In this way, many have been able to vehemently oppose the intrinsic evil of abortion while disregarding the Church’s teaching on issues like universal access to healthcare, immigration, and the death penalty. This distinction is problematic because it is taken as a license to ignore those who God has chosen to guide and direct us. Rather than listen to Church teachings in all areas and truly wrestle with them as we seek to apply them in our lives, many of us are quick to cast them aside, telling ourselves that certain areas of our lives are beyond the scope and authority of our faith.
Yet, Jesus was very clear that following him involves more than obeying in a narrow ‘religious’ field. In other words, following him entailed far more than correct temple worship. In fact, while he did occasionally teach about doing “religious” things correctly, even at those times, his focus often extended beyond the walls of the Temple. He said, “whenever you stand praying, forgive, if you have anything against anyone; so that your father in heaven may also forgive you your trespasses.” (Mark 11:25) His concern was not religion, but the person themselves. Jesus does not settle for prayers and sacrifices — he wants our lives.
To be a Christian is to reciprocate Christ’s gift of himself by placing our entire selves into God’s hands, recognizing that it is in him alone that we can truly live. We die to ourselves, so that everything we do can be for him (Matthew 16:25 and Colossians 3:23). We welcome his lordship over every aspect of our lives, not just those parts of our lives that exist for an hour on Sundays and — if God is lucky — during our daily Bible studies. We reject the gnostic dichotomy between the sacred and the profane, believing that through his death and resurrection, Christ has redeemed the whole of us. What we do now — the daily, nitty-gritty monotony of life — has been transformed by our Savior and given eternal significance. There is nothing that we keep apart from him.
It is then, the prerogative of the Pope, as Christ’s representative, to speak into every aspect of our lives — from the intimacy of the marital bed to the impersonal slaughter of modern war — because we have given Christ dominion over it all and, therefore, must humble ourselves to be taught by the one he has chosen to lead us. When Pope Leo speaks about these things, then, he is doing precisely what he has been chosen to do.
What is out of line, however, is government officials attempting to circumscribe which areas of our lives are under Christ’s rule and which are purely “secular.” To suggest that some areas are not the prerogative of the Church to address is to impinge on our freedom to practice our faith in all areas of our lives. It is a violation of the separation of Church and State, tyranny over the mind of men who, in their freedom, have chosen to submit themselves fully to the Lord.
Would these same leaders, who seek to delineate the role that the Pope should play in the lives of Catholics, be so quick to say that the Pope should not speak about issues related to homosexuality and transgender issues? I think not. Who are they, then, to determine which aspects of our lives and beliefs the Pope should not influence?
When religion uses politics to prevent the freedom of others to believe as their conscience dictates, then religion has failed to uphold the separation of Church and State. That is not what the Pope is doing. Instead, the violation of this basic American ideal is coming from the opposite direction.
“Traffic” (CC BY 2.0) by fourbyfourblazer
Ariane Sroubek is a writer, school psychologist and mother to two children here on earth. Prior to converting to Catholicism, she completed undergraduate studies in Bible and Theology at Gordon College in Wenham, MA. She then went on to obtain her doctorate in School and Child Clinical Psychology. Ariane’s writing is inspired by her faith, daily life experiences and education. She is currently writing a women's fiction novel and a middle-grade mystery series. Her non-fiction book, Raising Sunshine: A Guide to Parenting Through the Aftermath of Infant Death is available on Amazon. More of her work can be found at https://mysustaininggrace.com.
Popular Posts