Tensions are quietly escalating in the US between Donald Trump’s “MAGA” base and Christian nationalism on one side, and the Catholic Church under Pope Leo XIV on the other.

According to a report by Vox, the religious right is increasingly utilizing scripture and faith to justify and defend President Trump’s policies and burgeoning Christian nationalist sentiments. In contrast, the American Catholic Church is undergoing a profound transformation under the leadership of Pope Leo XIV.

Through new appointments, directives urging bishops to speak out on immigration, and public statements critical of the US’s trajectory under the Trump administration, the Pope is positioning his bishops and priests as missionaries for human dignity. In doing so, he has established the clergy as a counterbalance to the authoritarian and nationalist tendencies of the right.

While the Church has long played a role in US politics, Christopher Hale—a Catholic author, political activist, and owner of the Letters from Leo blog—argues that Pope Leo’s interventions represent something fundamentally new.

Hale suggests that in the absence of a well-organized “religious left” in the US, Leo’s steps to reform and shake up the American Catholic Church are revitalizing a “Catholic left.” This movement is taking a stand against the moral struggles of the 2020s, particularly regarding immigration and the spread of authoritarianism.

Leo’s plan to reorganize the American Church

According to Hale, Leo’s primary concern was the growing perception of the US Catholic Church as “reactionary.”

In New York, for example, Cardinal Timothy Dolan was known as “personable, charming, and friendly,” yet he was conspicuously identified with the political right.

His successor, Archbishop Ronald Hicks, appears somewhat less comfortable in front of the media but excels in his relationship with parishioners and is widely beloved among lay Catholics.

Hale acknowledges that the liberal dream of “replacing right-wing culture warriors with left-wing culture warriors” is unlikely to be fully realized. However, he points out the importance of recognizing that priests and bishops in the US Catholic Church tend to be significantly more conservative than their international counterparts.

While noting that the Pope attempts to avoid the “culture wars” in the US and does not wish to be “used as a weapon by either the left or the right,” Hale argues it is impossible to ignore Leo when he speaks on immigration and mass deportations.

Will Leo declare war on “MAGA authoritarianism”?

Hale observed that throughout the summer, Leo appeared frustrated by the USCCB (the leadership body of the US Church) for failing to speak with a unified voice, as bishops instead mobilized in a scattered fashion.

“For this reason, in October, he made it very clear that the church could not remain silent and must speak as one on this issue. A month later, the bishops acted almost unanimously, adopting the harshest stance toward the administration seen since the organization’s inception. This would not have happened during the Francis era; it would have been explained away or overlooked. The sensitivity of US bishops—particularly conservative ones—has increased extraordinarily over the past year. They have raised their voices in ways I don’t think they would have during Francis’s papacy.”

Hale further suggests that just as cardinals chose a Polish pope from behind the Soviet “Iron Curtain” to defeat communism, “God has chosen a pope from the Americas to defeat the spread of MAGA authoritarianism.”

“But I want to be very careful: John Paul II did not do this solely for the Polish people, but for the global community.

Similarly, I believe Pope Leo XIV views authoritarianism as something originating from America, but he is working to eliminate it for the benefit of the global community, not just for America’s sake. He reacts as strongly to any American intervention abroad as he does to specific domestic issues.”

Contending that Leo views “authoritarian regimes as a threat to human life,” Hale notes, “While his predecessors spoke extensively about abortion, in the single year Leo has been pope, he has spoken about immigration, war, and ecology a hundred times more often than he has mentioned abortion.”

Christian nationalism: A Protestant-Evangelical alliance against Catholicism

The author argues that the Christian nationalism Trump is associated with has no room for Catholics. “Christian nationalism is evangelical Protestant nationalism. It is vital to understand that the leaders of this movement do not believe Catholics are Christians; they do not believe we can achieve salvation,” he says.

“Christian nationalism and its sibling, MAGA authoritarianism, are inherently anti-Catholic. To be blunt, I am making a classist argument: I am saying that my class and my ethnic identity are excluded from this project. Yes, there is a war; it is a culture war that I welcome. The culture war between multi-ethnic American Catholicism and white evangelical Protestantism is one that the left can win.”

Claiming that the Pope believes the “authoritarian” trend in the US is more dangerous than any other issue, including immigration, Hale asserts, “Even conservative Catholic bishops see the limits of this Christian nationalism project.”

Arguing that they must oppose the Trump administration more directly and cannot rely on the president’s “goodwill and whims,” Hale concludes, “I am not sure of the existence of a religious left in this country, but the second Trump administration has shown me that a Catholic left certainly exists.”

JD Vance in the crosshairs of Catholic criticism

The most direct and sharpest Catholic outcry against the US administration followed the killing of Renee Good by ICE in Minneapolis.

In the aftermath of the killing, the White House—and Vice President JD Vance in particular—faced significant backlash for accusing Good of “terrorism.” In posts on X and during White House briefings, Vance argued that Good’s death was a “tragedy of her own making” and claimed she was “part of a broader leftist network” intent on attacking ICE officers.

In a scathing op-ed published shortly after, the National Catholic Reporter accused Vance of “justifying” Good’s killing, stating his comments were a “moral stain on the collective witness of our Catholic faith.”

Digital editor John Grosso wrote:

“In the past, a politician would offer thoughts and prayers, encourage those reacting to wait for the full results of an investigation, and generally try to calm the atmosphere. A leader could have used the opportunity of a new day to soothe the nation’s broken heart.”

Grosso argued that “as a Catholic,” Vance knows better than to engage in such manipulation and provocation, using harsh terms:

“Vance knows that only God can take a life. Vance knows that protesting, fleeing, or even interfering with an ICE investigation (for which there is no evidence Good did) does not warrant a death penalty. Vance knows that lying and killing are sins.”

The author continued, “He does not care. Vance’s distorted and false understanding of Christianity has been rejected by two popes.”

Grosso further stated that he views Vance’s Catholicism as a “simple tool for his career ambitions and desire for power.”

Immigration policy draws fire from bishops

In 2025, Pope Francis declined to attend an official meeting in the Vatican with Vance, sending Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin in his place to deliver a lecture on “compassion and migrant rights.”

The following day, Francis offered the vice president only a brief Easter greeting.

Francis’s final months were marked by increasingly sharp criticism, describing the mass deportations of the Trump era as “shameful” and “anti-Christian.” Shortly before passing away at the age of 88, he reportedly condemned Vance behind closed doors for the White House’s treatment of migrants.

His successor, Pope Leo XIV, also appears to be distancing himself from Trump’s immigration policy. When Vance traveled to Rome last year to represent the US delegation at Leo’s inauguration mass, the new pope greeted him briefly in public but held private meetings that same day with the presidents of Ukraine and Peru.

A longer meeting with Vance took place a day later, but the Vatican’s statement emphasized humanitarian concerns and “current international issues,” which was interpreted as a subtle signal of disagreement.

Outside of Rome, Catholic criticism of the administration’s immigration campaign has intensified. An article published on the Letters From Leo website stated that the new crackdown policy—supported by Trump’s “ostensibly Catholic Vice President JD Vance”—has led to “increased inhumane treatment” and noted these policies have faced “harsh criticism from two popes and the vast majority of bishops.”

In a lead article titled “Every Catholic Should Resign from ICE,” the text argues: “After a year of inhumane raids and papal condemnations, it is clear that no Catholic can, in good conscience, remain in ICE.”

Pope Leo’s silent resistance to American hegemony

In a speech delivered on January 9, Pope Leo XIV addressed global issues and alluded to his opposition to the Trump administration’s practices.

For example, Leo noted that peace is no longer sought as a gift but “through weapons as a condition for asserting one’s dominance,” and warned that this path “seriously threatens the rule of law.”

“War has come back into fashion, and the passion for war is spreading,” Leo warned, arguing that the principle prohibiting countries from invading their neighbors—established after World War II—has been “completely undermined,” with military force replacing dialogue.

Touching upon the abduction of Nicolas Maduro by the US, the Pope reiterated his call for “respect for the will of the Venezuelan people and the protection of the human and civil rights of all people.”

In his official address, Leo issued a direct jab at the US by condemning “power-based diplomacy” that endangers all peoples.

Following the speech, a tense interaction occurred between the US Ambassador to the Vatican, Brian Burch, and Leo during the formal greetings.

Burch had previously issued a statement suggesting that Leo actually supported Trump, aiming to justify the US invasion of Venezuela.

Like Francis before him, Leo listed conflicts ranging from Ukraine to the Holy Land and called for an immediate ceasefire in war zones.

Furthermore, he called for the revitalization of multilateral institutions, urging the United Nations to refocus on uniting humanity and mitigating the “devastating effects of war.”