Washington Letter: Trump meeting with a dozen bishops underscores major policy tensions
President Donald Trump met with a dozen U.S. bishops in the Oval Office less than two weeks before the midterm elections, prompting criticism over the timing and public presentation. A White House video showing bishops praying over Trump risked creating the appearance of a tacit endorsement, a Catholic University of America professor said. Milwaukee Archbishop Jeffrey Grob apologized, saying the meeting was publicized without participants’ consent and was not an endorsement of Trump, his policies or his party. The USCCB said it had no role in arranging the meeting and reiterated that the Church does not endorse or oppose political candidates.
about 2 hours ago
An Oval Office meeting between President Donald Trump and 12 U.S. bishops, held less than two weeks before the Nov. 3 midterm elections, drew criticism after the White House circulated video of the bishops praying over the president. The episode prompted concerns that the meeting could look like a political endorsement, while bishops and Church leaders emphasized that they intended to engage with public officials without backing a candidate or party. 1
John White, a politics professor at The Catholic University of America, said the video risked creating the appearance of a “tacit endorsement” and described the meeting as a campaign event from the White House’s perspective. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops said it had no role in arranging the meeting and reiterated that the Church does not endorse or oppose candidates. 1
Milwaukee Archbishop Jeffrey Grob apologized for the confusion, saying participants had not consented to public distribution of the footage and that it was filmed without their knowledge. He said the meeting was not an endorsement and that the bishops had come to pray and seek the common good. 1
Des Moines Bishop William Joensen likewise said the bishops had been told they would have a conversation with administration officials, not participate in a political event. He acknowledged that the timing was close to the election and said, in retrospect, he wished he had been more alert to the possibility that the meeting would be used for partisan purposes. 1
Denver Archbishop James Golka said he had initially thought the meeting would be private but understood it could be shared and used politically. He defended praying for leaders regardless of political agreement, while recognizing that the video’s release 12 days before the election led some viewers to interpret it as an endorsement. 1
White House Faith Director Jenny Korn rejected the “photo op” characterization, saying the discussion covered religious freedom, school choice, family tax credits, religious visas and life issues. 1
The meeting took place amid disagreements between Catholic teaching and several administration policies. The article notes bishops’ objections to mass deportations and family separation, and concerns over the detention of children and pregnant women; it also reports that the Archdiocese of St. Louis had sued over a policy it said restricted priests from providing Communion and hearing confessions for people held by ICE. 1
Kevin Appleby of the Center for Migration Studies said he hoped the bishops raised immigration concerns, including pastoral access to detainees. He also pointed to disputes over ICE arrests at sensitive locations such as houses of worship, schools and hospitals. 1
Other points of tension included the administration’s approval of a generic form of mifepristone and its efforts to pause state lawsuits challenging eased restrictions on the abortion medication. Pro-life groups criticized those actions, while the article also notes that Trump signed a law temporarily cutting some federal funding to Planned Parenthood, funding that later resumed. 1
The article also places the meeting against bishops’ recent objections to a proposed livestream of a military execution, later canceled, and Pope Leo XIV’s criticism of the ongoing war in Iran. 1
A Pew Research Center survey cited in the article found Trump’s approval rating among U.S. Catholics had fallen from 47% at the start of his second term to 30% in October 2026. White linked the meeting’s timing to that decline and to the approaching midterms. 1
The article also describes controversy surrounding a campaign advertisement in Ohio’s gubernatorial race that featured the estranged mother of Democratic candidate Amy Acton criticizing her daughter. White called the ad’s use of the family’s history “not a good look.” 1
USCCB President Archbishop Paul Coakley, in an Oct. 14 statement, reminded Catholics that participation in public life, including voting, is both a right and a responsibility. The bishops direct voters to the conference’s Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship as a guide to making electoral choices. 1*
Catholic political witness requires principled independence from partisan power
Catholic political witness requires engagement without capture: Catholics should participate in public life, parties may be vehicles for action, and Church leaders may engage political officials—but neither faith nor the Church’s mission should be subordinated to a party’s fortunes. The measure is not partisan loyalty but fidelity to moral principles, human dignity, and the common good.
The Church’s nonpartisanship does not mean indifference to public affairs. The U.S. bishops describe the Church as involved in the political process, while saying it cannot champion a candidate or party. Its public cause is the defense of human life and dignity and the protection of the vulnerable. The Church may therefore speak clearly about moral questions, assess the consequences of policies, and seek to persuade public officials without becoming an arm of a political campaign.
Nor are Catholic laypeople called to avoid politics. The bishops present political participation and public service as worthwhile, and Vatican II’s teaching, quoted in their document, says that the laity are called to bring a Christian spirit into earthly life and witness to Christ in human society. Independence means that political activity is judged in the light of faith—not that faith is kept out of political activity.
Partisan affiliation can be legitimate, but it must remain subordinate to conscience. The bishops put the relationship plainly:
“Our participation in political parties or other groups to which we may belong should be influenced by our faith, not the other way around.”
This rules out treating a party platform as a complete moral guide or excusing serious wrongdoing simply because it benefits one’s preferred side. The bishops warn against becoming so attached to a party or interest group that fundamental moral truths are neglected or denied. They also say that Catholics may need to help transform their party rather than allow the party to reshape their moral judgment.
That does not require every Catholic to reach identical conclusions on every policy or vote. Political decisions often involve practical judgments about complex and changing circumstances. The bishops call Catholics to make such judgments through prudence—a virtue that helps apply well-formed moral principles to concrete choices. But prudence is not a license to discard basic moral principles whenever they become politically inconvenient.
Principled independence asks voters to look beyond party identity. The bishops say Catholics should assess candidates’ positions on issues affecting human life and dignity, justice, and peace, while also considering their integrity, philosophy, and record. They urge citizens to scrutinize campaign rhetoric and choose leaders according to principle rather than party affiliation or self-interest.
This is a demanding standard, not a simple formula for endorsing one candidate. A voter must consider the moral importance of different issues, the likely effects of policies, and what a candidate has actually done or is likely to do. The supplied guidance establishes the framework for that discernment; it does not claim that every election presents a choice without difficulty or that one party embodies Catholic teaching in full.
The bishops describe Catholic social teaching as “principled but not ideological.” It is a moral and theological way of evaluating social realities in the light of faith and the Church’s tradition—not a party blueprint. They call for politics that gives greater weight to moral principles than to opinion polls, to the needs of the weak rather than the benefits of the strong, and to the common good rather than narrow interests.
This matters because political independence is not merely a refusal to endorse parties. It also means resisting the reduction of Catholic witness to whichever issues are most useful to a political coalition. The bishops describe Catholic engagement as drawing on a broad moral framework and on the Church’s practical service to people in need, including the sick, the poor, immigrants, refugees, families, and women facing difficult pregnancies. Catholic witness is most credible when its principles shape both public argument and concrete service.
Dialogue with officials and candidates is compatible with independence. The bishops say the Church welcomes dialogue and seeks to engage and persuade public officials, but caution that public events and photo opportunities cannot replace serious discussion. The distinction is between access that serves honest moral engagement and a political display that makes the Church appear to endorse a person or party.
The same care applies to Catholic organizations and publications. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith warns that political support contrary to the Church’s moral and social teaching on fundamental ethical questions can conflict with an organization’s claim to be Catholic. It also cautions against misusing the idea of political autonomy as though it detached political choices from moral principles. Political autonomy allows legitimate lay judgment about practical matters; it does not mean moral neutrality.
The result is a form of witness that is neither partisan capture nor political silence. Catholics can work with others, enter parties, debate policy, and seek influence—but must remain willing to criticize their own side, refuse to make party loyalty the measure of faithfulness, and pursue the common good with charity and justice. The Church’s independence is not an escape from politics. It is what enables political engagement to remain accountable to something greater than political power.