By David Maurwitz and Deece Eckstein
This month, the College of Cardinals elected Cardinal Robert Francis Prevost of Chicago to be the 267th leader of the world’s 1.4 billion Catholics. Pope Leo XIV, as he will now be known, is the first pope ever from the United States.
As a cardinal, and now as pope, Leo has consistently advocated for the poor and the marginalized, particularly immigrants. This has put him in tension with President Trump. Both leaders claim to be restoring Christianity to its proper role in American life.
One will be continuing a lifetime of preaching, religious education, study and work among the poor and less fortunate populations around the world. The other will be working to maintain his popular support among evangelical Christians.
Evangelical Christians have been a durable and essential part of Donald Trump’s political coalition, playing important roles in both his 2016 and 2024 elections. Post-election polls in 2024 indicate that Trump won the support of 8 in 10 evangelical voters, who comprise 20% of the electorate.
Trump is very conscious of this support, and in February issued an executive order creating a task force to “eradicate anti-Christian bias” in the government and in society. This task force is charged with locating “anti-Christian” policies, practices and conduct within federal agencies.
However, in the executive order, there is no definition for un-Christian polices, practices or conduct, except the mention of arrests for praying and protesting outside of reproductive health facilities. Reports of violence committed by the same people against those centers, their staff and their clients are not mentioned.
With that framing, many Christians are likely to welcome the task force. But there are problems with this approach.
First, in a country founded on the separation of church and state, what does it mean to have a big government bureaucracy deciding what constitutes anti-Christian bias?
Second, it is probably safe to say that the versions of Christianity believed by President Trump and Pope Leo are different, even radically so. Who gets to decide what Christianity requires of us as people of faith and as a nation?
Let’s consider two examples that have been in the news recently.
Earlier this year, the Trump administration cut off funding for refugee resettlement efforts, leaving nonprofits, many of them faith-based, struggling to help thousands of people they had already taken under their wing. It also announced that many refugees would be returned to their home countries — including thousands of Iraqis and Afghans who fought alongside U.S. troops in those countries and who would likely face punishment or even death back home.
These decisions beg the question: is it “Christian” to cut off services to refugees trying to live in our country after fleeing war and famine and persecution in their homelands? Is it “Christian” to deport people who fought bravely for the U.S., when we know they will return to a country hostile to them?
Moreover, last week the deputy secretaries of state and Homeland Security effusively welcomed a planeload of white South Africans to the United States, hailing them as victims of discrimination and racially based violence in their home country.
Soon after, the Episcopalian Church in the U.S. ended its longtime partnership with the government to provide such services, arguing that the decision to cut off services to hundreds of thousands of refugees already in the country while welcoming the Afrikaners, whose safety and circumstances were demonstrably better, violated their religious values and mission. Should the task force step in and decide that the administration’s choice represented “anti-religious bias?”
Meanwhile, here in Texas, Attorney General Ken Paxton continues his quest to shutter Annunciation House, which has been providing shelter and other services to migrants awaiting their immigration hearings for over 50 years. Paxton argues that providing such services, even to people who are complying with the immigration process, violates state law.
This week, the Texas Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case. Annunciation House argues that the work it does is an expression of religious values, protected under the First Amendment, the same way a coach praying on a public school football field is protected. Paxton argues that the housing and other services Annunciation House provides amounts to human trafficking.
Many religious leaders believe and advocate the Annunciation House is just doing what their faith and the Bible teaches. Would the task force decide that Paxton’s crusade represents “anti-religious bias”?
The question for all of us: should a big government bureaucracy decide what is Christian and what is not? Who should cast the first stone?
The new American Pope is a sign of the vitality of the American Catholic Church, which is still the largest single denomination in the country. He is also lifting a prophetic voice in contradiction to some of what the Trump administration, claiming to act with the blessing of American Christianity, is doing. This tension will become sharper as Pope Leo finds his voice.
