Archbishop Coakley Says Loss of Federal Funds Ended Resettlement Services but Not Core Mission
Archbishop Coakley discussed immigration on EWTN’s 'The World Over with Raymond Arroyo.'
about 2 months ago
Archbishop Paul Coakley, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), explained that the termination of federal grant money for refugee resettlement has forced the bishops’ agencies to cease their dedicated resettlement programs, but it has not altered the USCCB’s broader charitable and pastoral mission. He also reaffirmed the Church’s support for immigrants while recognizing a nation’s right to secure its borders. 1 2
In 2024 the USCCB received more than $180 million in federal contracts, the bulk of which funded migrant‑related services. After President Donald Trump assumed office, his administration cancelled most of those contracts, ending the flow of funds. As a result, the USCCB has discontinued its formal refugee‑resettlement services. 1
Coakley stressed that the loss of dollars does not impair the bishops’ ability to pursue their core mission of evangelization, charity, and advocacy. He noted that the USCCB will simply adjust its budgets to continue these essential activities. 2
The archbishop acknowledged that every nation has a sovereign right to protect its borders, yet he urged a welcoming attitude toward immigrants. He referenced a USCCB special message, approved by a 216‑5 vote, which opposes “indiscriminate mass deportations” and calls bishops to accompany and support migrants across the country, especially at the border. 1 2
The federal grants that funded the USCCB’s migrant work were part of a broader partnership between the government and Catholic charities. The abrupt termination under the Trump administration marked a sharp policy shift, ending a decade‑long collaboration that had enabled extensive resettlement assistance. 1
Coakley highlighted that the United States has long been a nation of immigrants, noting that “all but a few” Americans come from migrant families. This personal connection informs the bishops’ sensitivity to the challenges faced by both migrants seeking safety and citizens concerned about security. 2
Churches must uphold mission despite loss of state refugee funding
The loss of government funding for refugee services may force churches and Catholic agencies to reduce programs, reorganize staff, or seek new sources of support. Yet, from a Catholic perspective, the Church’s mission to welcome, protect, and accompany refugees does not originate in government contracts. It arises from the Gospel, the dignity of the human person, and the Church’s responsibility toward the vulnerable. Public funding can support that mission, but it cannot define or replace it.
Catholic ministry to refugees is not merely a form of social assistance or an extension of public administration. It is a concrete expression of Christian charity. The Church sees every person as created in the image and likeness of God, and Christ identifies himself with the stranger: “I was a stranger and you welcomed me.”
The Compendium of the Catechism connects care for the poor directly to Christ’s teaching in Matthew 25:
“Whatever you have done to the least of my brethren, you have done to me.”
This means that a reduction in state funding may change the practical form of Catholic refugee ministry, but it does not eliminate the moral obligation to serve. The Church’s preferential concern for the poor and vulnerable is described as indispensable “always and everywhere.”
The USCCB likewise teaches that love for those in need is essential to the Church’s life alongside sacramental ministry and preaching. This preferential option for the vulnerable includes immigrants and refugees.
Catholic agencies in the United States have historically cooperated with the government in refugee resettlement. The USCCB has received competitive federal grants for its role in the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program and in services for unaccompanied minors and other legally eligible populations. Much of this funding has been passed to local Catholic Charities agencies that directly serve newcomers.
Those arrangements, however, have always involved more than government money. The refugee-resettlement system was designed as a public-private partnership, with federal resources supplemented by private donations and in-kind contributions.
More importantly, Catholic support for refugees predates the federal programs themselves. The U.S. Catholic community assisted displaced persons after the Second World War and welcomed refugees from the Soviet Union, Hungary, Vietnam, Cuba, and elsewhere before the modern U.S. refugee program was established.
This history is significant. It refutes the idea that Catholic refugee advocacy is primarily financially motivated. The Church’s solidarity with refugees existed before government reimbursement and therefore cannot be reduced to institutional self-interest.
Although the mission remains, the loss of state funding can have serious consequences. Government grants often support practical services such as:
The Church’s teaching recognizes that refugees need more than temporary material relief. Catholic social teaching emphasizes protection, access to basic services, education, employment, legal assistance, family reunification, and integration into society.
Therefore, the withdrawal of funding should not be treated as an ordinary budgetary adjustment with no human cost. It may mean that vulnerable people face greater risks of homelessness, exploitation, family separation, untreated trauma, or inability to navigate complicated legal systems.
The USCCB has specifically urged preservation of humanitarian protections, due process, family unity, legal pathways, and policies that promote integration. Its concerns about asylum restrictions likewise stress that vulnerable people may lose access to life-saving protection when legal standards and procedures become practically impossible to meet.
Catholic teaching does not require the denial of a nation’s legitimate responsibility to regulate its borders. The Catechism states that prosperous nations should welcome foreigners seeking security and livelihood insofar as they are able, while also recognizing that political authorities may establish juridical conditions for immigration. Immigrants, in turn, have duties toward the country that receives them, including respect for its laws.
The USCCB makes the same distinction: nations have the right to take measures against irregular immigration, but those measures must respect the human rights of all. Catholic concern is especially directed against approaches that rely disproportionately on punishment, undermine family unity, weaken humanitarian protections, or provide no realistic legal solution.
Thus, defending refugee services is not equivalent to rejecting border security or the rule of law. The Catholic vision seeks both responsible public order and humane protection. The bishops describe the natural right to migrate as balanced with the right of nations to maintain their borders.
A loss of public funding could tempt religious institutions to narrow their mission to worship and internal parish activities. Catholic teaching rejects that reduction. In Fratelli Tutti, Pope Francis states that the Church “does not restrict her mission to the private sphere” and must not remain on the sidelines in the work of building a better world.
He describes the Church as:
“A home with open doors,” called to accompany life, sustain hope, build bridges, break down walls, and sow reconciliation.
This does not mean that every parish can continue every program at the same scale. Prudence requires financial accountability, respect for civil law, protection of minors, competent professional practice, and honest assessment of available resources. But prudence concerns how the Church serves, not whether the Church should abandon people in need.
The Church may need to move from a grant-dependent model toward a broader network of diocesan, parish, philanthropic, and volunteer support. This could include:
Such measures should be organized carefully rather than improvised. Pope Francis specifically mentions individual and community sponsorship, dignified housing, access to basic services, education, employment, temporary shelter, and integration as appropriate responses to humanitarian crises.
The Church’s responsibility does not end with direct service. It also includes advocating for laws and policies that protect human dignity. The USCCB has consistently supported immigration reform, expanded legal immigration opportunities, due process, family unity, and humanitarian protections, while opposing an enforcement-only approach.
Pope Francis teaches that the Church has a public role beyond charity and education because it must contribute to the common good and integral human development. Consequently, if the withdrawal of state funding leaves refugees without essential protection, Catholic leaders may appropriately call upon public authorities to reconsider their policies, fulfill humanitarian obligations, or develop alternative funding mechanisms.
The Church’s advocacy should remain nonpartisan and focused on principles rather than political allegiance. It should defend the rights and dignity of refugees while acknowledging legitimate concerns about public order, sustainable integration, and the responsibilities of receiving nations.
The Pontifical Council for the Pastoral Care of Migrants and Itinerant People warns that governments should not suspend efforts to assist refugees when resettlement may be their only possibility of survival. It also emphasizes that solidarity requires overcoming fear and selfishness, promoting social integration, and coordinating international and local action.
This is particularly relevant when public funding is withdrawn. A society’s treatment of refugees becomes a test of whether responsibility for the vulnerable is viewed as a shared moral duty or merely as a service available only when financially convenient.
Pope Francis similarly identifies a “twofold moral responsibility”: protecting the rights of citizens while also assuring assistance and acceptance to migrants. The Church therefore should resist both extremes: an unrealistic approach that ignores social capacity and a restrictive approach that treats refugees as burdens rather than persons.
The loss of state refugee funding may require Catholic agencies to make difficult decisions, reduce certain services, and seek new forms of support. It does not, however, release the Church from its mission. That mission is grounded in Christ’s command to welcome the stranger, the equal dignity of every human person, and the Church’s preferential love for the poor and vulnerable.
Catholic communities should respond by preserving essential services, strengthening private and parish-based solidarity, advocating for humane public policies, and cooperating responsibly with civil authorities. The Church’s task is not to replace the state indefinitely, but neither is it to abandon refugees when government support declines. Its enduring vocation is to remain a visible sign of a society in which human dignity, mercy, justice, and the common good are upheld.