World Religions News

(RNS) — The United States House, in a bipartisan effort that highlighted Republican division over the Trump administration’s immigration policies, passed a bill Thursday (April 16) to allow Haitian migrants temporary legal protections to live in the U.S. for three years. The vote came as the government is fighting at the Supreme Court to end Temporary Protected Status for an estimated 330,000 Haitians currently in the country.

The bill now goes to the Senate, and President Donald Trump said he would veto it if it reached his desk.

Introduced last year by Rep. Laura Gillen, D-New York, the bill passed 224-204, with the support of 10 Republican lawmakers. The bill’s text had been stuck in the House Committee on Rules and reached the full House after 218 representatives supported a discharge petition — the first time such a rare move enabled an immigration bill to pass. 

The Rev. Keny Felix, a senior pastor at Bethel Evangelical Baptist Church in Miami, was one of many Haitian pastors who met with House members in Washington, D.C., over the past month to persuade them to support the bill. Felix said in a statement that the vote “affirms the dignity of our Haitian neighbors, whose homeland continues to be marked by unrestrained gang violence, government instability, and a growing humanitarian crisis where more than a million people have been internally displaced.” 

The status, granted to Haitians in 2010 after a deadly earthquake, allows those who fled to live and work legally in the U.S. It has been maintained through the years due to gang violence in Port-au-Prince, the country’s capital.

Former Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, who was fired by Trump in March, announced early last year she would terminate the status because the island’s safety conditions no longer justified it. Noem’s decision, which would have ended TPS in February 2026, has been challenged in multiple lawsuits, including some filed by Haitian faith organizations. 

In February, hours before the status was set to expire, a U.S. district judge blocked Noem’s attempt to terminate TPS, saying the secretary’s order overlooked records showing Haiti was still plagued by a “perfect storm of suffering” that had a “staggering humanitarian toll.” In her February ruling, Judge Ana Reyes said the secretary’s decision seemed motivated, “at least in part,” by racial animus against a group of immigrants from a non-white country.

The government appealed the decision to the Supreme Court. In March, Justices agreed to hear arguments in Trump v. Miot on Haitians’ TPS, and Noem v. Doe, on Syrians’ TPS, during the court’s April session. A ruling is expected in June.

The Haitian community has been a target of Trump and Vice President JD Vance since their 2024 presidential campaign, when both pushed false claims that Haitians living in Springfield, Ohio, ate their neighbors’ pets. 

On April 3, Trump posted a video of a Haitian man beating a woman to death with a hammer in Fort Myers, Florida, on his Truth Social account. In the post caption, the president described the incident as “the most vicious things you will ever see” and brought Haitians’ TPS into question, pointing at the government’s efforts to win termination of the status at the Supreme Court.

The Springfield controversy put the city’s 15,000 Haitians under the spotlight but also fueled solidarity efforts among its faith community. In recent months, G92, a local coalition of pro-immigrant churches, has led the efforts to defend Haitians’ TPS. As they awaited the February ruling, the group staged faux immigration arrest scenarios at local churches to teach best practices to faith leaders in the event of raids at houses of worship. The group also sent a delegation to D.C. in March in support of the bill. 

Pastor Felix’s D.C. delegation, which attended a lunch briefing for Haitian clergy at the Cannon House Office Building in late March, included a representative of the Fellowship of Haitian Evangelical Pastors in New England and a Haitian faith leader from Indiana. The meeting, sponsored by Rep. Ayanna Pressley, D-Massachusetts, was coordinated by Faith in Action, a national network that organizes faith communities advocating for immigrants.

“For years, our Haitian siblings have lived with the constant threat of displacement despite contributing to the fabric of our communities,” said Claudette David, of Faith in Action International, in a statement. “Today, we honor their organized power and resilience and celebrate one important step toward a more just and humane immigration system, one that recognizes that these TPS holders are image bearers of God.”

The bill co-sponsors include Haitian-American Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick, D-Florida; Rep. Michael Lawler, R-New York; and Rep. Thomas Suozzi, D-New York. Republican lawmakers who supported the bill include Mike Carey and Mike Turner of Ohio, Rich McCormick of Georgia, and Mario Diaz-Balart of Florida.

To: POTUS

From: White House Faith Office

Re: Religion messaging

Sir, 

As you can imagine, we have been following with great interest your truths and public comments in the faith space. Of course you are totally correct and, as Secretary of War Pete Hegseth said, the Fake News Media is behaving like those self-righteous Pharisees we read about in the Bible. But we think it might be helpful for us to, with your permission, point out a few things.

First, there’s that AI image you posted of yourself as the nation’s Healer-in-Chief. That’s absolutely what you are and what you wanted to communicate to the American public, as you said. Franklin Graham was spot on when he posted that there was no halo, no crosses and no angels to represent you as Jesus. 

But here’s the thing, sir. Jesus Himself is known as The Great Physician. That’s from one of our favorite Scriptures, where Jesus says in the Gospel of Mark, “They that are whole have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.” Just like, we would say, the huge number of former Democrat voters who switched to you in the last election.

Anyway, here’s the thing. When Jesus is portrayed as the Great Physician, he’s often wearing a red cloak over a white robe.

So you can understand why even House Speaker Mike Johnson thought it would be a good idea to delete it. Which you did and, Praise the Lord, replaced it with that beautiful picture of Jesus giving you a hug.

Because what a friend you have in Jesus! And, indeed, vice versa. Which you suggested in your post about God playing his Trump card. As opposed, of course, to the Radical Left Lunatics playing their pope card. And shame on Pope Leo for letting himself be played, especially after all you did to get him elected.

We do agree with what you posted about him being soft on crime and terrible for foreign policy. Actually, we’d like to ask (paraphrasing one of President Vladimir Putin’s predecessors), “How many nukes does the pope have?” That would be: as many as Iran has now, thanks to you. Even if, as you said, he wants Iran to have one. 

Still, we do think it’s sometimes the “better course of valor” to take to heart what Jesus said about “turning the other cheek” and not get into a “p__ing contest” with the head of the world’s biggest religious body — which has a lot of members in America.

For that reason, it was, we think, excellent that the vice president got you off the hook by saying “it’s very, very important” for Leo “to be careful when he talks about matters of theology.” Who could imagine a newbie Catholic issuing such a caution to the Vicar of Christ? Well played, sir. 

On the other hand, it wasn’t so great that Hegseth asked attendees at a Pentagon worship service to pray with him by way of an adaptation of the famous riff on Ezekiel 25:17 that Samuel L. Jackson delivers prior to killing a man in the movie “Pulp Fiction.” Maybe you could ask the SecWar to dial it back a little when addressing the Lord.

Let’s wrap this up by complimenting you on having that grandma bring you bags of McDonald’s outside the Oval Office the other day. OK, she didn’t come through with a thumbs-down on men in women’s sports. But with that cool new sign, “The Oval Office,” it was just like you were a CEO taking delivery of America’s burgers outside a Marriott conference room. Talk about a common touch!

We do hope you enjoyed your “Royale with cheese” or “Le Big Mac” (a little “Pulp Fiction” joke). And thank you for your attention, sir, to these matters (another little joke).

(RNS) — On Sunday night (April 12), President Donald Trump posted a lengthy broadside on Truth Social against Pope Leo XIV that started with “Pope Leo is WEAK on Crime, and terrible for Foreign Policy.” Trump then doubled down, telling reporters: “I’m not a big fan of Pope Leo. He’s a very liberal person.”

Many of us had no idea that the pontiff was WEAK [sic] on crime. I have visited Vatican City, and I have not had to keep my eye on my wallet or passport. 

This is not the first time that the president has gone at it with a Christian leader. Recall Episcopal Bishop Mariann Budde preaching after Trump’s inauguration at Washington National Cathedral, imploring him to show the Christian quality of mercy. He complained about her, too. 

(Not to be left out, many rabbis crave an insult from Trump. It looks good on a resume.)

And then, Trump posted an AI-generated image of himself — wearing a white robe, laying his right hand on a man who appeared sick or dying, with a bright light emanating from his fingers, and the American flag, eagles and military planes flying behind him. He resembled Jesus, but he told reporters, “I thought it was me as a doctor, and had to do with Red Cross, as a Red Cross worker there, which we support. Only the fake news could come up with that one.” He went on to say that he had saved lives. 

What is going on here, theologically?

I suspect my Christian theologian friends would label this as blasphemy. I would offer a different word for it: idolatry.

Idolatry is not merely worshipping many gods or false gods. It is not merely the worship of a golden calf. The original, primordial idolatry is the worship of the self.

It is the ancient sin of Pharaoh, who proclaimed himself a god. It is precisely what Pope Leo XIV had in mind when, just the day before Trump’s attack, he stood at the prayer vigil at St. Peter’s Basilica and declared: “Enough of the idolatry of self and money! Enough of the display of power! Enough of war! True strength is shown in serving life.”

The pope was not being political. He was being prophetic.

I am a Jewish religious leader. The pope is the supreme religious leader of the Roman Catholic Church, and if president Trump’s crude words insulted my Catholic friends and readers, I share your anger and hurt.

The pope and I do not agree on everything, nor should we. On war and peace, our traditions carry different nuances. Iran has been amassing an arsenal, nuclear and conventional, with one goal in mind: wiping out the Jewish state. Many Jewish leaders, and certainly many Israelis, see the war in Iran as milchemet mitzvah, an obligatory, existential war against the ultimate evil of our time.

The pope’s tradition leans more consistently toward aggressive peace-making. I share his ultimate vision of shalom, of peace, but I would argue the path there sometimes requires a harder reckoning with the nature of evil.

These are genuine and honorable theological differences. I would love to have a latte with the pontiff to discuss them.

In fact, not every Catholic thinker would agree with the pope on the war in Iran. Pastor Gerald Murray writes in The Free Press that he believes this war meets the centuries-old conditions for a just war under the doctrine of the Catholic Church:

Waging just war is a last resort to protect the innocent by defeating the enemy. It is a virtuous act to take up arms in defense of the nation against an unjust aggressor.

Does this mean that one must wait for the enemy to attack before a nation can commence morally legitimate military action to neutralize the threat? No, that would be a dereliction of duty if the intent and capabilities of the prospective aggressor were known with certainty. The Iranian regime is a relentless enemy, using proxies to kill Americans and America’s allies. There is no doubt that Iran has been and presently is a grave threat.

Vice President JD Vance, himself a Catholic, doesn’t like what the pope said — and doesn’t believe that the pope should be opining on theology. That is called chutzpah.

But the pope is doing his job because a religious leader is supposed to speak truth to power.

The Hebrew prophets understood this. When King David committed adultery with Bathsheba and arranged the murder of her husband, Uriah, the prophet Nathan did not look the other way because David was the most powerful man in the kingdom. He walked into the palace and said: “You are the man.”

When King Ahab and Queen Jezebel murdered the innocent Naboth to steal his vineyard, the prophet Elijah did not stay home and tend to his own affairs. He confronted the king directly: “Have you murdered and also inherited?” Ahab called him “a troubler of Israel” (I Kings 18:17), and the description fit — because a prophet does not only cause “good trouble” for a king, but for an entire people. 

No wonder the Christian author Frederick Buechner said this about the prophetic role: “There is no evidence to suggest that anyone ever asked a prophet home for supper more than once.” 

Trump and his supporters have both misunderstood and distorted the role of religion in a democratic society. Religious communities are not supposed to be cheerleaders for the state. They are supposed to be umpires, calling strikes and balls — and mostly, foul balls.

Pope Leo XIV understands this. He told reporters aboard the papal plane: “I have no fear of either the Trump administration or speaking out loudly of the message of the gospel, which is what I believe I am here to do — what the church is here to do.”

And on the same weekend Trump posted an image of himself as the healer of the sick, Leo was on his way to Algeria — to lay a wreath, to pray for the dead and to speak of dignity and reconciliation.

One man seemed to imagine himself as Jesus. The other one simply tried to act like him.  

(RNS) — Pope Leo was on an airplane headed for Algeria to begin a two-week tour in Africa when he was asked to respond to Trump’s attacks.

Leo’s position was clear: Enough of war. God rejects the prayers of leaders who wage violence. The path forward must be negotiation, ceasefire and dialogue.

His focus has remained on the human cost — lives lost, families displaced and communities destroyed. Without papal processes, authorizations, approvals or official editing, Leo answered Trump’s attacks saying:

“I have no fear of either the Trump administration, or speaking out loudly of the message of the Gospel … ‘Blessed are the peacemakers’ is a message that the world needs to hear today.”

In the 1930s, German theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer once described confronting the tyranny of Hitler as standing in the path of a speeding car driven by a madman and said the church needed to find ways to stand in front of the madman’s car. Pope Leo’s airplane comments now serve as a model for faith leaders and communities to respond when facing dangerous political rhetoric.

In a recent podcast with Kim Daniels, director of Georgetown’s Initiative on Catholic Social Thought and Public Life, and Christopher Smith, associate director of the initiative and a biographer of Pope Leo, both pointed out that popes have always spoken out against “the presumption of war” and called people back to the work of peace. Leo stands firmly in that tradition, and as an American, his voice is drawing particular attention, offering a clear contrast in tone and moral focus to that of Trump.

That contrast has become more visible in recent days. We saw Trump’s blasphemous posts including the AI generated image of himself depicted as Jesus Christ, robed and glowing, with warplanes overhead. The reactions and discussion following the posts have been astonishing. A CNN commentator made his word of the week “blasphemy.” Trump deleted the blasphemous post. But that was not the end; Trump just kept going.

Donald Trump has long exhibited a messianic complex. That raises serious concerns about the judgment of a commander in chief overseeing the most powerful military in the world. Religious language is being used to frame military action in ways that risk turning a geopolitical conflict into something resembling a holy war. Pete Hegseth, the self-titled secretary of war, regularly talks about U.S. military successes and then adds, “But to God be the glory.” This should give pause to anyone concerned with the integrity of faith and public leadership.

The moral voice of faith leaders is essential. At the Center on Faith and Justice at Georgetown, we are encouraging and supporting faith leaders and clergy around the country to find ways to speak out to their own constituencies and congregations, because religious communities have both the reach and the responsibility to speak clearly for peace. This is a moment to use that influence before the ceasefire ends and in the uncertain days that follow.

Since the U.S. and Israel started the war in Iran earlier this year, thousands of people have been killed, many more injured and millions displaced.

As people of faith, we must stand on the authority of our sacred Scriptures and speak with moral clarity. We must unequivocally oppose the war in Iran and condemn all false religious statements and claims made to justify violence and war by false prophets, who choose power and warmongering over the gospel. This moment requires us to confront the sin of Christian nationalism and any distortion of our faith that seeks to sanctify war. Instead, we must lift up the teaching of Jesus at this critical moment. “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God.” This is a gospel calling to resist violence, seek reconciliation and stand firmly on the side and process of peace. Our call to peacemaking compels us to confront the human and moral cost of this war.

The financial burden of this war, which most people in the U.S. are opposed to, is estimated at over $1 billion per day and will likely come at the expense of essential social programs. Proposed cuts to Medicaid, food assistance, housing and other essential supports are being considered and mean that the “least of these” will bear an even greater burden. This reality stands in direct tension with Jesus’ teaching in Matthew 25, which calls us to care for those most in need.

As Martin Luther King Jr. warned in his 1967 speech about Vietnam, “A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.”

Religious leaders across traditions are beginning to speak out, calling for diplomacy, restraint and accountability. Cardinal Robert McElroy of Washington, D.C., has made a very strong statement against the war in Iran. Even the more conservative military archbishop of the Catholic Conference, Timothy Broglio, has also now called this war unjust. Pope Leo has called for Catholics in America to write their members of Congress asking them to reject violence, oppose the war and push for peace. Our voices must continue to grow. Advocacy, public witness and direct engagement with elected officials are all necessary.

If Trump decides to escalate further, difficult moral choices may arise, including for those asked to carry out orders. In such moments, the broader faith community must be prepared to support conscience and uphold ethical responsibility. This is a test of truth and courage and a refusal to allow faith to be used in service of violence or power.

(The Rev. Jim Wallis is Archbishop Desmond Tutu Chair and director of Georgetown University’s Center on Faith and Justice and is the author, most recently, of “The False White Gospel: Rejecting Christian Nationalism, Reclaiming True Faith, and Refounding Democracy.” A version of this commentary appeared on the Substack God’s Politics with Jim Wallis. The views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of RNS.)

(RNS) — On the night of April 18, 1775, Paul Revere’s ride set in motion a chain of events that would alter the course of history. Within hours, at Lexington and Concord, the shot heard round the world marked not only the beginning of a revolution, but also the emergence of a new understanding of freedom.

For those who stood on the village greens, the question was immediate and urgent: Would they submit to authority imposed from afar, or resist it? Beneath that surface, people like John and Abigail Adams had a deeper aspiration that would define America for generations to come.

The revolution that began that morning was not simply a rejection of British rule. It was the beginning of a new idea, that authority could be rooted not in monarchy, but in the people themselves. Freedom, in this vision, required participation, shared responsibility and a form of government that George Washington would describe as “the great experiment.”

This framework, however, has never been easy to grasp. 

Long before the U.S. founding, Jewish tradition wrestled with a similar question about the nature of freedom. Each year at the Passover Seder, this tension emerges in the voice of the so-called “wicked son,” who asks: “What is this service to you?” The question, despite its direct Biblical source, is often read as a defiant rejection of communal identity.

Our instinct is to recoil at the tone, but in doing so we risk missing the depth of the challenge, one that speaks directly to the civic moment we face in America today.

The Hebrew word for service, avodah, also means work, and it is closely linked to servitude and slavery. The wicked child of the Seder probes its implications. If the Israelites are no longer slaves to Pharaoh, are they not now in service to the King of Kings? With a demanding system of commandments, has one form of bondage simply been replaced by another?

This is not a question to dismiss, but one question that every free society must answer.

Jewish tradition responds with clarity that not all authority is the same. Pharaoh’s rule imposed arbitrary power and stripped human dignity. The Torah, by contrast, introduces obligation rooted in moral purpose, calling individuals into a shared covenant. Freedom, in this framework, is not the absence of constraint, but the presence of public responsibility. True liberty is the capacity to build a just society, care for the vulnerable and uphold the rule of law.

The American experiment rests on a similar foundation. Instead of eliminating obligation, the shift from subject to citizen transformed it. Laws, taxes and civic duties were no longer external impositions, but rather expressions of a system sustained by the participation of its people.

That vision, however, depends on understanding. And today, that understanding has eroded.

According to the National Assessment of Educational Progress, as of 2022, only 22% of eighth graders were proficient in civics. Surveys also consistently show that many adults cannot name the three branches of government or pass a naturalization test. These gaps point to a deeper problem, namely that a democracy cannot function if its citizens do not understand how it works.

When that understanding fades, the line between authority and oppression blurs. Disagreement turns into distrust. Gratitude is replaced with grievance. The very habits that sustain a free society begin to weaken.

As Ruth Wisse, a scholar of Yiddish literature and Jewish culture, cautioned in her recent National Endowment for the Humanities Jefferson Lecture, “If there is to be enduring government of, by and for the people, the people would have to be instructed and reminded to respect and confidently to perpetuate their precious inheritance.”

Civic education, long rooted in both democratic and religious traditions, is about equipping young people with the tools to ask hard questions and engage with competing answers. It teaches not only how institutions function, but why they matter, and how individuals are called to participate in sustaining them and in the shared work of self-government.

In this sense, a child with revolutionary questions is not the problem. The greater danger is a society that fails to provide meaningful answers that nurture civic faith and trust.

As we approach America’s 250th anniversary, let us celebrate the choices citizens have made in every generation about how they could better understand and strengthen the freedoms they have inherited. Much focus has been placed over the years on the shot that started the war. And yet, the revolution truly began when Revere and his fellow riders embraced the opportunity to lend their voices and devote their energy to an idea bigger than themselves.

May their ride — and the declaration that followed — inspire our actions in the years to come.

(Rabbi Charles E. Savenor is executive director at Civic Spirit, a national organization that works with Jewish, Catholic and Christian schools to strengthen civic knowledge, civil discourse and democratic responsibility. The views expressed in this commentary do not necessarily reflect those of Religion News Service.)