WHAT THE USCCB MEETING SAID ABOUT THE US BISHOPS, POPE FRANCIS, AND DONALD TRUMP

 

What the USCCB Meeting Said About the US Bishops, Pope Francis, and Donald Trump

ANALYSIS: Here are four important takeaways from the bishops’ most recent gathering in ‘America’s Premier See.’

 

Cardinal Christophe Pierre, papal nunio to the U.S., addresses the USCCB fall 2024 meeting on its first day; seated, L to R: Father Michael Fuller, general secretary of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops; USCCB president Archbishop Timothy Broglio and USCCB vice president Archbishop William Lori. (photo: YouTube screenshot via USCCB)

 

Jonathan Liedl NationNovember 14, 2024

 

With the dust still settling from both the U.S. presidential election and the universal Catholic Church’s Synod on Synodality, the U.S. bishops’ just-concluded Nov. 11-14 assembly in Baltimore came at a critical juncture for both the Church and the nation.

And while the bishops addressed several important matters of business, such as the conference’s budget, a new translation of the New American Bible, and the causes of canonization of two American women, several other moves offered important symbolic indicators of where the conference currently stands in relation to both Pope Francis and President-elect Donald Trump. 

Here are four important takeaways from the bishops’ most recent gathering in “America’s Premier See.”

1. The bishops are ready for a second Trump administration.

When Donald Trump was elected to his first presidential term in 2016, it shocked the world, the USCCB included. 

This time around, the bishops seem prepared for both the opportunities and the challenges that a Trump presidency represents.

On multiple occasions during the bishops’ two days of public meetings they spoke candidly and with measured pointedness against the possibility of mass deportations of undocumented immigrants. 

First, USCCB president Archbishop Timothy Broglio received rousing applause during his opening address when, after saying that the bishops “do not encourage illegal immigration,” he passionately emphasized that we will all be judged by God for how we care for the needy, including “the stranger.” Then, at a press conference, Bishop Mark Seitz of El Paso, Texas, underscored that while the bishops are waiting to see what Trump does, they’ll speak out “loudly” if his immigration rhetoric becomes reality. Bishop Seitz followed that up during his migration committee presentation by warning about “nativist and anti-immigrant sentiment” and urging his brother bishops to provide public leadership on the issue.

The bishops also seem aware of some of the pro-life threats, but also possibilities, represented by the incoming administration. In comments to the Register, Arlington, Virginia, Bishop Michael Burbidge, who chairs the USCCB’s pro-life committee, expressed concerns about Trump’s embrace of in vitro fertilization (IVF) on the campaign trail, but also said he was optimistic about the possibility of working with the new administration on ways to provide material support to mothers, babies and families. 

Another bishop told the Register that reaching out to Vice President-elect JD Vance, a Catholic convert who has demonstrated an unusually high interest in Church teaching and theology, needs to be a top priority. 

While the bishops are themselves waiting to see what direction Trump goes on any number of controversial issues, how effective they can be in their engagement with the new administration will be interesting to watch.

2. There was no showdown over synodality.

In the days leading up the USCCB’s fall assembly, observers were on the lookout for a possible brouhaha over how the conference would carry forward “synodality,” Pope Francis’ signature effort to make the Church more inclusive and participatory and the subject of a recently concluded Vatican synod.

That’s because the progressive minority in the conference had launched a public campaign for the establishment of some sort of permanent synodal body within the USCCB. In a joint interview published on the last day of the synod, Cardinals Blase Cupich of Chicago and Robert McElroy of San Diego called for the creation of a USCCB committee on synodality that “needs to be properly staffed and resourced.”

In contrast, other leading prelates who appear more representative of the USCCB majority have emphasized that the U.S. is already sufficiently blessed with synodal structures and should instead focus on fostering a culture of listening and welcome at local levels.

But when it came time during the USCCB fall meeting to discuss synodality, there was not a hint of a showdown.

Instead, Cardinal McElroy calmly suggested from the floor that leadership should consider the creation of a task force for synodality, an idea that Archbishop Broglio warmly received. Cardinal Cupich then suggested that there be a voice vote among the assembly to gauge support for the idea. When the vote was conducted, there wasn’t a single “nay.”

What happened? One possibility is that a compromise was struck beforehand, quite possibly during the behind-closed-doors executive session that took place on the assembly’s first day, Nov. 11. A USCCB task force is sort of an in-between option, less well-funded and permanent than a committee, but still more than nothing at all.

If this is how things played out, it’s another instance of how the USCCB leadership’s increasing tendency to handle sensitive conference matters out of the limelight is paying dividends in terms of avoiding ugly public confrontations and leading to consensus.

3. The bishops by-passed conservative stalwarts for key committee posts.

Looking to USCCB executive and committee elections for some sort of decisive indication of the bishops’ overall ecclesial direction is a fool’s errand, given the multitude of factors that can motivate how individual bishops select their preferred candidates.

But two outcomes from the slate of fall 2024 elections seem to be consistent with an ongoing trend of well-known, outspoken conservative bishops coming up short.

Portland’s Archbishop Alexander Sample, a longtime supporter of the traditional Latin Mass, lost out on the chairmanship of the Committee on Divine Worship to Cleveland’s Auxiliary Bishop Michael Woost, 128-112. And conservative cultural commentator Bishop James Conley of Lincoln, Nebraska, was beat by Bishop Edward Burns of Dallas for leadership of the Committee on Laity, Marriage, Family Life, and Youth, 147-91. 

These outcomes follow San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone losing to Bishop Daniel Thomas of Toledo, 161-84, in last year’s pro-life committee election, a vote that came a year and a half after the California prelate had publicly barred pro-abortion U.S. Rep. Nancy Pelosi from receiving the Eucharist in his archdiocese.

In each case, the men who defeated the conservative stalwarts are not progressives. In fact, vocal progressives have arguably been resisted even more clearly than their conservative counterparts in recent USCCB elections. Cardinal Joseph Tobin of Newark, New Jersey, for instance, lost a 2022 bid to become USCCB secretary to Oklahoma City’s Archbishop Paul Coakley, 130-104. Two other prelates associated with the same wing, Archbishop Paul Etienne of Seattle and Archbishop Christopher Coyne of Hartford, Connecticut, have also had disappointing showings in recent USCCB elections.

Taken altogether, these outcomes suggest that the U.S. bishops may be looking for leaders who aren’t necessarily going to be particularly confrontational in their engagement with the wider culture, but also aren’t going to shy away from any of the Church’s moral or doctrinal commitments. In other words, dialogical, orthodox pastors, the same kind of profile that seems to match many of the everyday episcopal picks made throughout the U.S. during the Francis pontificate, albeit perhaps not the most high-profile ones.

4. Pope Francis’ concerns were prioritized.

For all the ink that has been spilled about a perceived rift between Pope Francis and the U.S. episcopacy, it wasn’t detectable at the USCCB fall meeting. In fact, if anything, the meeting’s agenda took its lead from the Pope’s priorities.

There were presentations on how papal teaching documents like Laudato Si and Dignitas Infinita are serving as sources of ongoing inspiration for the bishops’ catechetical resources and outreach. 

Dilexit Nos, Pope Francis’ recent encyclical on the Sacred Heart of Jesus, was praised, with USCCB doctrine head Bishop Daniel Flores of Brownsville, Texas, suggesting that the text is the key for understanding what the Pope means by synodality.

The implementation of the instituted lay ministries of catechist, acolyte and lector, all established by Pope Francis, is also moving forward.

And a new, evangelization-focused “mission directive,” which will guide the conference’s overall work from 2025 to 2028, seems to be inspired by Pope Francis’ 2022 apostolic constitution, Praedicate Evangelium, which restructured the Vatican Curia around the goal of proclaiming the Gospel.

Another indication of positive relations was papal nuncio Cardinal Christophe Pierre’s address to the assembly, which included none of the corrective exhortations found in some of his previous interventions. In fact, the papal representative congratulated the bishops on this past summer’s National Eucharistic Congress and encouraged them to continue to draw close to the Sacred Heart of Jesus. 

Some commentators have suggested that because Francis-created cardinals aren’t in leadership positions at the USCCB the U.S. episcopacy is out of step with the Pope. That doesn’t seem to be the case. In fact, the USCCB’s just-concluded fall 2024 assembly may have been its most Francis-friendly yet.

https://www.ncregister.com/news/2024-usccb-meeting-takeaways