Democrats Pretend to Be on “Team Pope”

Just as liberal elites are currently attempting to drive a wedge between Catholics and Evangelicals, they are also attempting to open up a rift between Catholics and the Republican Party – specifically President Donald Trump.

The ongoing public spat between Trump and Pope Leo XIV over U.S. immigration policy and the war in Iran has provided the perfect opportunity for the Left to sow anti-GOP sentiment among the all-important Catholic voting bloc ahead of the midterm elections. But what conservatives – and Catholic conservatives especially – must realize is that the Left does not suddenly care about defending the Pope or Catholic teaching. Rather, they hope that by pretending to be on “Team Pope” they can manipulate Catholics into voting against their own interests – and undermine President Trump in the process.

This hypocritical attempt to get Catholics to move left, however, presents both hilarious dark humor and a dangerous situation.

That there is – or can be – a real tension between religion and politics is not unusual. No Catholic (or any other Christian) thinks that earthly politicians do all things well or even correctly. Thus the disagreement over the Iran War, with Vice President Vance and Secretary of State Rubio (both Catholic) supporting American military strikes and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) and various individual bishops supporting Pope Leo’s comments that are critical of the conflict.

The debate over the wisdom and justice of American military action in Iran is natural and indeed a good thing. The canons of just war theory, which have long been accepted in Catholic, Protestant, and even some secular circles, are not simple, connect-the-dots rules. They require interpretation.

The USCCB posted a summarized version of those canons taken from The Catechism of the Catholic Church. While many simply take the papal opposition to the Iran strikes as dispositive, that is not the end of the question. Catholics believe (a hard claim, to be sure, for other Christians) that popes can speak infallibly, meaning without error, on certain occasions. But those occasions are rare and carefully defined. They rarely include prudential decisions about complicated applications of moral reasoning that might be decided in different ways.

In fact, even among Catholics, there are different applications of just war theory. The eminent Catholic philosopher Edward Feser has argued, for reasons he spells out, that the Iran War is unjust. The eminent Catholic philosopher J. Budziszewski’s argument, on the other hand, concludes that “it seems to me that this war is just.”

It is worth noting here that the Catechism states: “The evaluation of these conditions for moral legitimacy [of war] belongs to the prudential judgment of those who have responsibility for the common good.”

Of course, even that is part of the debate. Professor Feser thinks the Iran War requires a Congressional declaration to be just, while Professor Budziszewski argues that, “Despite claims to the contrary, the administration has followed the provisions of America’s War Powers Act.”

Some believe (and this writer is among them) that the Iran debate among Catholics is not the real issue. For Pope Leo and the American anti-Trump bishops, the real dispute is over questions of immigration, welfare, and globalization more generally.

These, too, however, are issues of prudential judgment about policy that are still delegated to the public authorities and not churchmen, even if it is perfectly reasonable that churchmen be able to offer their own opinions on matters of public record.

Catholics know that the Catechism doesn’t merely encourage wealthy nations to be generous to those seeking security or prosperity in a different country. It also outlines what countries may do legally and what immigrants must do in the countries to which they wish to immigrate. “Political authorities,” it teaches, “for the sake of the common good for which they are responsible, may make the exercise of the right to immigrate subject to various juridical conditions, especially with regard to the immigrants’ duties toward their country of adoption.”

In other words, we are not obligated to make immigration easy, especially for those who disregard American law. The Catechism adds, “Immigrants are obliged to respect with gratitude the material and spiritual heritage of the country that receives them, to obey its laws and to assist in carrying civic burdens.”

There is, then, a very solid case for our restrictive immigration policy even from a Catholic standpoint—whether or not Catholics agree with every single aspect of the policy. Of course, there are many other issues on which Catholics will take issue with the Trump administration and Republicans more generally. That is not surprising. As G.K. Chesterton observed, Catholics are bound to agree on a few things and bound to disagree on the rest. And that goes especially for issues so complicated as national policies about a country with the size and complexity of ours.

Also unsurprising is the attempt to exploit these internal Catholic disagreements for the benefit of Democrats. As demographer Ryan Burge has noted, Catholics have turned red since 2008, when they voted 50/50 in the presidential election. In 2024, they voted 56-42 for Trump over Harris. Republicans have a 2-1 advantage over Democrats in the white Catholic vote. Among non-white Catholics, while only 24 percent voted for Trump in 2016, 40 percent did so in 2024.

One may not be able to speak of a unitary “Catholic vote” anymore, but one can say that Catholics have leaned increasingly right in recent years.

The reasons for that leaning are pretty obvious. Democrats have become the party of abortion absolutism, LGBTQ+ ideology (including gender-mutilation for kids!), and even euthanasia. All of these go directly against Catholic teaching. While Republicans have not always done the best job of opposing Democrats on these issues, it’s still a no-brainer which party more closely aligns with biblical values.

The absurdity of Democrats claiming that they are “on Team Pope,” as did Senator Ed Markey, famous for wearing a pin that reads “ABORTION” on his jacket, would probably be considered too implausible for fiction.

Equally absurd is Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker posting a picture of himself shaking hands with Pope Leo, who vainly begged the politician to veto a physician-assisted suicide bill. Even more outrageous, the caption to that photo read, “The Pope lifts his voice as part of a higher calling – one centered on peace and the preservation of human life.” One wonders how Pritzker squares that praise with his own personal support for radical abortion policies and the state-sanctioned murder of the sick and elderly.

Catholics are famous for taking a realistic approach to politics. While nobody thinks Donald Trump or Republicans are perfect on every prudential issue, they know that the Democrats are “not on Team Pope” – except perhaps when they can cynically exploit the papacy to hurt President Trump.

With regard to the black-and-white issues on which no Catholic (or indeed any sane person of any faith) can disagree, the Democrats have no intention of even considering listening to the Pope – or any other biblical authority, for that matter.

David P. Deavel teaches at the University of St. Thomas in Houston. A past Lincoln Fellow at the Claremont Institute, he is a Senior Contributor at The Imaginative Conservative. Follow him on X @davidpdeavel.