null / Credit: Wolfgang Schaller/Shutterstock

Washington, D.C., Dec 2, 2025 / 17:04 pm (CNA).

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments Tuesday on whether a New Jersey faith-based pregnancy center may immediately assert its First Amendment right to challenge a state subpoena demanding donor information — including names, addresses, and places of employment — in federal court, or whether it must first proceed through the state court system.

The case, First Choice Women’s Resource Centers, Inc. v. Platkin, has drawn support from a diverse array of groups, including the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, members of Congress, the Trump administration, and the ACLU. All argue that First Choice should be able to challenge the subpoena in federal court without first litigating the issue in New Jersey state court.

At the center of the dispute is a 2023 subpoena issued by New Jersey Attorney General Matthew J. Platkin seeking extensive donor information from First Choice. In 2022, Platkin created what he called a “reproductive rights strike force” to “protect access to abortion care,” and his office issued a “consumer alert” describing crisis pregnancy centers like First Choice as organizations that may provide “false or misleading information about the safety and legality of abortion.”

In its Supreme Court brief, First Choice describes itself as a faith-based nonprofit serving women in New Jersey by providing material support and medical services such as ultrasounds and pregnancy tests under a licensed medical director. The organization does not provide or refer for abortions, a point it plainly and repeatedly states on its website.

Platkin’s subpoena commanded First Choice to produce documents and information responsive to 28 separate demands, including the full names, phone numbers, addresses, and current or last known employers of every donor who contributed money by any means other than one specific website. It warned that failure to comply could result in contempt of court and other legal penalties.

The attorney general’s office said it needed donor identities to determine whether contributors were “misled” into believing First Choice provided abortions. Platkin argued he needed donor contact information so he could “contact a representative sample and determine what they did or did not know about their donations.”

First Choice quickly sued in federal court, arguing the subpoena violated its First Amendment rights by chilling its speech and freedom of association. The federal district court dismissed the case as “unripe,” ruling that the pregnancy center must wait until a New Jersey court seeks to enforce the subpoena. The Supreme Court later agreed to hear the case to determine whether First Choice may pursue its challenge in federal court now.

At oral argument, First Choice’s attorney, Erin M. Hawley, told the justices that the court has “long safeguarded the freedom of association by protecting the membership and donor lists of nonprofit organizations.” Yet, she said, “the attorney general of New Jersey issued a sweeping subpoena commanding on pain of contempt that First Choice produce donor names, addresses, and phone numbers so his office could contact and question them. That violates the right of association.”

Hawley urged the court to recognize that the subpoena was issued by “a hostile attorney general who has issued a consumer alert, urged New Jerseyans to beware of pregnancy centers, and assembled a strike force against them.”

She also noted that the attorney general “has never identified a single complaint against First Choice” and that the threat of contempt and business dissolution is “a death knell for nonprofits like First Choice.”

Arguing for New Jersey, Sundeep Iyer, the attorney general’s chief counsel, said First Choice had not demonstrated that the subpoena “objectively chilled” its First Amendment rights. He argued that the subpoena is “non-self-executing,” meaning it imposes no immediate obligation and cannot require compliance unless a court orders enforcement.

Justice Neil Gorsuch appeared skeptical, noting that New Jersey law gives attorney general subpoenas the force of law and allows the attorney general to seek contempt orders against those who fail to comply. “I don’t know how to read that other than it’s pretty self-executing to me, counsel,” he said.

Justice Elena Kagan questioned whether an “ordinary person” receiving such a subpoena would feel reassured by the claim that it required court approval before being enforced. A donor, she said, is unlikely “to take that as very reassuring.”

In an amicus curiae brief, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops urged the court to side with First Choice. “Compelling disclosure of a religious organization’s financial support violates the constitutional guarantee of freedom of religion,” the bishops wrote. Forced donor disclosure, they argued, interferes with a religious organization’s mission and burdens the free-exercise rights of donors who give anonymously in accordance with scriptural teachings.

The Supreme Court is expected to issue a decision in the coming months.

Bishop Chad W. Zielinski of New Ulm, Minnesota. / Credit: Diocese of Fairbanks

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Dec 2, 2025 / 15:38 pm (CNA).

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) allocated more than $7.8 million to strengthen American mission dioceses, which are dioceses that cannot sustain themselves without additional funds.

The USCCB Subcommittee on Catholic Home Missions announced the grants on Dec. 1, which will provide 69 dioceses and eparchies with funds for the 2025-2026 budget year, according to a news release. The subcommittee reviewed the grant requests in the fall.

Per the news release, the funds were generated through collections from parishioners during the Catholic Home Missions appeal, which is taken up annually throughout the country. Many mission dioceses are in regions with small Catholic populations and in rural areas that are affected by economic hardship, the bishops said in the announcement.

“When parishioners contribute to the Catholic Home Missions Appeal, they bring faith, hope, and love where it is most needed, regardless the amount of their gift,” Bishop Chad Zielinski of New Ulm, Minnesota, subcommittee chair, said in a statement.

“Their gifts have a profound, positive impact on Catholics who face poverty or the isolation of being a small, minority faith,” he said.

The recipients include the Diocese of Rapid City’s Standing Rock Reservation Ministry, which serves the Standing Rock Sioux tribe. Three Franciscan sisters and one priest lead the team to provide home visitations and faith formation, which cares for 500 Catholics at four parishes and offers social support and accompaniment to 8,000 other residents, according to the bishops.

Recipients include the Diocese of Brownsville, Texas, for its Office of Deliverance Ministry, which provides prayers of deliverance for those with spiritual struggles. 

Another recipient is the Syro-Malankara Eparchy of St. Mary Queen of Peace, which has 24 priests that serve 11,000 parishioners but has no paid lay staff. The grant supports a youth summer camp, retreats, family conventions, and vocational discernment.

“These stories reveal the wide range of spiritual and financial needs that the Catholic Home Missions Appeal addresses,” Zielinski said. 

“Parishioners in mission dioceses already give sacrificially from their limited means,” he added. “My prayer is that their example of faith will inspire the rest of us [to] dig deeper to help our neighbors carry out the mission that Jesus has entrusted to us,” Zielinski said. 

The cathedral in Zagreb, Croatia. / Credit: Fogcatcher/Shutterstock

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Dec 2, 2025 / 13:33 pm (CNA).

Police in Croatia’s capital city of Zagreb suspect that a nun stabbed herself and then falsely reported that she had been attacked, according to a police report.

St. Columba Cathedral in Youngstown, Ohio. / Credit: Carol M. Highsmith, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

CNA Staff, Dec 2, 2025 / 13:03 pm (CNA).

The Diocese of Youngstown, Ohio, and one of its Catholic high schools are facing multiple lawsuits over the alleged mishandling of multiple reports of bullying and student-led abuse.

Of the four lawsuits, three were filed in federal district court and the fourth was filed in a county court of common pleas. They allege that Ursuline High School in Youngstown failed to prevent the bullying and harassment of several students.

In the federal lawsuits, attorneys allege that Ursuline ignored multiple instances of harassment and bullying from the school’s football players. Ursuline was aware of the abuse, the suits claim, though administrators allegedly did nothing in order to protect “the glory of [the school’s] football team.”

One suit alleges that a football player engaged in protracted sexual harassment and eventually physical abuse of a young female student, including “asking [her] for sex and nude photos” and eventually allegedly dragging her across the grass to give her “turf burn.”

In another suit, several football players are alleged to have “harassed, bullied, and ridiculed” a student identified in the filing as gay. The alleged victim is alleged to have reported the abuse to school officials, who reportedly “failed to stop or address the misconduct.”

Another suit claims football players participated in “hazing, physical and sexual abuse, kidnapping, production and dissemination of child pornography, and theft,” including an incident in which multiple players allegedly stripped a classmate nude, physically abused him, and recorded the attack to post on social media platform Snapchat.

A fourth lawsuit, filed by the mother of an Ursuline student in Mahoning County Court of Common Pleas, alleges that officials with the school knew ahead of time of a student’s intent to attack her daughter but did not take steps to prevent it, leading to the daughter allegedly being violently assaulted in the school cafeteria.

The three federal suits allege violations of Title IX education rules, while the suit in county court claims violations of Ohio law.

A spokeswoman for the Youngstown Diocese pointed to an earlier statement from Bishop David Bonnar on the suits. The prelate said the diocese was “deeply saddened” by the allegations. He added leaders in the diocese “will do their best and are doing their best to work through this.” 

Ursuline High School, meanwhile, pledged in a statement to “allow the legal process to proceed” regarding the four lawsuits.

“That said, the incidents in question were reviewed in detail at the time, and Ursuline High School is confident that all appropriate actions were taken by faculty and staff members,” the school said.

“In particular, there is no evidence that Ursuline failed or was derelict in any of its child protection duties,” the statement added, arguing that the allegations of dereliction appear to be “baseless and completely without merit.”

Subodh Chandra, whose law firm is representing the plaintiffs in the suits, said in a statement on his firm’s website that the suits indicate “a deep and pervasive culture of protecting Ursuline’s image, particularly its athletic program, above the sacred duty to protect children.”

“Our clients all continue to ask: How do these administrators still have jobs? Why has the bishop of the Catholic Diocese of Youngstown done nothing to hold Ursuline’s administration accountable?” Chandra said.

The suits are seeking hundreds of thousands of dollars in damages from the defendants.

null / Credit: Karina Lopatina/Shutterstock

CNA Staff, Dec 2, 2025 / 12:33 pm (CNA).

The University of Colorado’s medical school will pay out a massive eight-figure settlement after it required multiple staffers, including a Catholic doctor, to obtain the COVID-19 vaccination. 

The Thomas More Society said the university’s Anschutz School of Medicine “agreed to pay more than $10.3 million in damages, tuition, and attorney’s fees” to 18 plaintiffs in the lawsuit. 

The legal group said in a Dec. 1 release that the plaintiffs had been “denied religious accommodations to mandatory COVID-19 vaccinations.” The suit has been active for nearly five years. 

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit had ruled in 2024 that the university had violated the plaintiffs’ “clearly established” First Amendment rights in refusing to issue religious exemptions to the COVID vaccine. Religious objectors have cited numerous concerns with the vaccines, including that they were developed using fetal cell lines. 

Thomas More Society attorney Michael McHale said the plaintiffs in the case “felt forced to succumb to a manifestly irrational mandate” without any exemption for their sincere religious beliefs.

“We are confident our clients’ long-overdue victory indeed confirms, despite the tyrannical efforts of many, that our shared constitutional right to religious liberty endures,” he said.

The lawsuit was originally filed on behalf of a Catholic doctor and a Buddhist medical student, with numerous other plaintiffs subsequently joining the litigation.

Thomas More Society litigation head Peter Breen said the objectors “stood up, at great personal cost, to an injustice that never should have been inflicted on them — or on any American.”

“Because they had the courage to say ‘no’ when their religious freedoms were trampled, people of faith across the country now enjoy stronger protections,” he said. 

Madison Gould, a plaintiff in the case, said in the legal group’s press release that the university’s policy “gutted the years of study and self-sacrifice poured out by so many in pursuit of serving the weakest among us.” 

Gould expressed gratitude to lawyers at the Thomas More Society “for standing by us when no one else would.”

“May our nation never witness anything like this travesty again,” she said. 

Religious objectors in recent years have won several major victories against institutions that have required them to undergo COVID vaccination with a religious exemption. 

In 2022 NorthShore University HealthSystem agreed to pay $10.3 million to more than 500 workers after the health system denied them religious exemptions to the vaccine.

In 2024, meanwhile, a Catholic woman in Michigan won $12.7 million after Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan fired her after refusing to grant her a religious exemption. 

And in July of this year, a federal appeals court revived a Catholic worker’s lawsuit against the Federal Reserve Bank of New York over the bank’s having fired her for refusing to take the COVID vaccine.

Bishop Patrick Neary of the Diocese of Saint Cloud, Minnesota. / Credit: Photo courtesy of the Diocese of Saint Cloud

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Dec 2, 2025 / 12:03 pm (CNA).

Bishop Patrick Neary of Saint Cloud, Minnesota, has been appointed as the chair of Catholic Relief Services’ (CRS) board. 

Neary was appointed by Archbishop Paul Coakley, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ (USCCB) president. Neary succeeds Archbishop Nelson Pérez of Philadelphia. 

Neary assumes responsibilities for the role immediately, and the term runs until November 2028. 

“It is a profound honor to serve as chairman of the Catholic Relief Services board,” Neary said, according to a press release. “My years in Africa and in parish ministry have shown me the face of Christ in the poor and the vulnerable, and I carry those encounters with me into this role.”

Neary praised CRS for embodying the Church’s mission of compassionate accompaniment of those in need and lauded his predecessor, Pérez, for “his commitment to advocating for the dignity of the poor and amplifying the voices of the vulnerable.”

“I hope to lead with a heart of mercy, listening and working alongside our partners to uphold the dignity of every person,” Neary said. “Together, we will continue to bring the light of Christ to communities around the world, especially those most in need.”

Neary has served as bishop of Saint Cloud since he was appointed by Pope Francis in December 2022. He served in Kenya and Uganda for eight years before returning to the U.S., then served as rector of Holy Redeemer Parish in Portland, Oregon. 

“We are delighted for Bishop Neary to join as CRS chairman of the board of directors,” said Sean Callahan, president and CEO of CRS. “We are certain that he will bring strong leadership and help CRS continue our mission of lifesaving work and advocacy for our sisters and brothers around the world.”

Neary was ordained a priest in 1991 at the University of Notre Dame, where he was also rector for many years. 

According to its website, CRS serves 225 million people across 122 countries annually and has 1,735 partners around the world. 

The faceless Nativity scene in Brussels, Belgium, in November 2025. / Credit: Maxim Van den Bossche

Brussels, Belgium, Dec 2, 2025 / 10:08 am (CNA).

Faceless cloth Nativity figures on Brussels’ Grand Place have sparked international debate over Christian tradition versus inclusive art.

Three Augustinian nuns (pictured on Sept. 16, 2025) fled their nursing home and returned to their convent in Austria. / Credit: Courtesy of Nonnen_Goldenstein

EWTN News, Dec 2, 2025 / 09:14 am (CNA).

Three Austrian nuns have rejected a compromise to remain at Goldenstein Monastery, escalating a yearslong dispute that now goes to Rome.

A person detained is taken to a parking lot on the far north side of the city before being transferred to an Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in Chicago on Oct. 31, 2025. / Credit: Jamie Kelter Davis/Getty Images

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Dec 2, 2025 / 06:00 am (CNA).

Catholic bishops in the United States have expressed unified disapproval of the “indiscriminate mass deportation of people” as the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) reported over 527,000 deportations and another 1.6 million self-deportations since Jan. 20.

Several Catholics in the Trump administration, such as Vice President JD Vance and Border czar Tom Homan, have invoked their faith to defend the heavy crackdown on migrants who do not have legal status in the country after the bishops’ message of dismay.

Caring for immigrants is a clear command in Scripture. Catholic teaching on the matter of mass deportations is somewhat nuanced, with obligations on wealthy countries to welcome immigrants and responsibilities for immigrants to follow the laws of the nations receiving them. The Catholic approach to immigration in recent decades has underscored mercy and respect for the migrants’ human dignity and prudence on the part of public officials to safeguard the common good, with an emphasis on a response to migrants that “welcomes, protects, promotes, and integrates.”

While Catholic teaching affirms human dignity and the right to migrate when necessary, debate has centered on the means of immigration policy.

When is a deportation policy ‘intrinsically evil’?

If something is “intrinsically evil,” it means that it is immoral under any circumstance and for any reason, regardless of one’s motivation or the intended consequence of the action. That term is reserved for actions themselves that can never be morally justified.

As St. John Paul II explained in his 1993 encyclical Veritatis Splendor, an “intrinsically evil” act is one that, by its very nature, is “incapable of being ordered to God” because the act is in conflict with “the good of the person made in his image.”

He cites Gaudium et Spes, the pastoral constitution on the Church in the modern world issued by the Second Vatican Council in 1965, to offer some examples of intrinsic evils.

Although the council itself does not use the term “intrinsically evil,” he references the council’s description of actions that are “opposed to life itself,” which include “murder, genocide, abortion, euthanasia, or willful self-destruction.” It also lists, among other things, action that “insults human dignity,” such as “subhuman living conditions, arbitrary imprisonment, deportation, slavery, prostitution, [and] the selling of women and children.”

Neither John Paul II nor the council elaborate on the meaning of “deportation” in this context in those specific documents. Although, in his 1991 encyclical Centesimus Annus, the Holy Father spoke about deportations within the context of forced removal of people during World War II: “As a result of this violent division of Europe, enormous masses of people were compelled to leave their homeland or were forcibly deported.”

Joseph Capizzi, dean of the School of Theology and Religious Studies at The Catholic University of America, told CNA the context appears to refer to deportations that are both “arbitrary” and “without due process,” like during World War II.

“The context was, of course, mass deportations of people absent any due process and their treatment as movable property, or chattel,” he said. “That is by definition treating those humans as subhuman, offending their God-given status by their creation in his image and likeness.”

In relation to “subhuman living conditions” being intrinsically evil, Capizzi said all people “must be treated as humans” regardless of legal status. No person, he said, can be treated “with cruelty” or “absent basic human regard.”

Father Thomas Petri, OP, a moral theologian and former president of the Dominican House of Studies, told CNA that deportation, as an enforcement of immigration law, “in and of itself can’t be intrinsically evil.”

“There is going to be prudential debate and prudential discussion on what constitutes immoral, evil deportation,” Petri said.

“Even if there’s disagreement on who should be deported, when the deportation happens, it should happen in a way that doesn’t undermine the dignity of those being deported,” he said.

“Even when there is justified deportation, …  those who are being deported [must be treated] … humanely, respecting human dignity, which includes the natural rights to food, human living conditions [and] … access to religion,” Petri said.

“Anything that contradicts or harms their human dignity is certainly grave,” Petri said.

When can governments limit immigration?

The Church has consistently encouraged nations to welcome the stranger, in line with Christ’s command in Matthew 25:35, and has also recognized the government’s need to protect the common good.

In 1988, the Pontifical Commission for Justice and Peace issued a document called “The Church and Racism,” which addressed the subject.

For immigrants and refugees, the commission said governments must ensure their “basic human rights be recognized and guaranteed.” Such people could be “victims of racial prejudice” and are at risk of “various forms of exploitation, be it economic or other.”

The document also acknowledged that public powers are “responsible for the common good” and must “determine the number of refugees or immigrants which their country can accept.” The governments should consider “possibilities for employment and its perspectives for development but also the urgency of the need of other people.”

Another concern is a need to avoid “a serious social imbalance” that could be created “when an overly heavy concentration of persons from another culture is perceived as directly threatening the identity and customs of the local community that receives them.”

Pope Pius XII made similar observations when addressing American officials in 1946, saying then: “it is not surprising that changing circumstances have brought about a certain restriction being placed on foreign immigration” and “in this matter not only the interests of the immigrant but the welfare of the country also must be consulted.”

Such restrictions, he said, should still never forget “Christian charity and the sense of human solidarity existing between all men, children of the one eternal God and Father.”

The Catechism of the Catholic Church sums up the Church’s position, teaching that prosperous nations have an obligation, “to the extent they are able, to welcome the foreigner.” The immigrant has an obligation “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.”

“Political authorities, 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,” it adds, without touting mass deportation as a moral ideal.

Capizzi said governments must “protect an actual common good.” For immigration law, he said this means “sometimes by allowing immigrants in to assist, and also by limiting immigration to allow immigrants’ integration into the host nation, and to protect the nation’s work force.”

Enforcement, he said, can occur after a person has unlawfully entered, but cases that require deportation should inspire more prudence.

Petri said the primary concern comes “when you’re talking about [people] who have been in this country for 20 years.”

“There is a moral difference between deporting hard and violent criminals and deporting, say, a husband and a wife who have just tried to make a living,” he said.

ABOARD THE PAPAL FLIGHT FROM LEBANON (CNS) -- At the end of his first foreign trip as pope, a trip focused on dialogue, Pope Leo XIV said the examples of friendship and respect he had seen could be a helpful example for people in North America and Europe, too.

For example, the stories of Christians and Muslims helping each other in Lebanon when their villages were destroyed, he said, offer the lesson that "we should perhaps be a little less fearful and look for ways of promoting authentic dialogue and respect," the pope told reporters Dec. 2 during his flight back to Rome from Lebanon.

Often, fear of Muslims in the West is "generated by people who are against immigration and are trying to keep out people who may be from another country, another religion, another race," he said. "In that sense, I would say that we all need to work together."

Pope Leo set off from Rome to Turkey Nov. 27 and headed to Lebanon Nov. 30. On the way home, he spent more than 25 minutes responding to reporters' questions.

Topics ranged from his election to future trips and from Venezuela to Ukraine. 

After his repeated appeals throughout the trip for an end to violence in the Middle East, violence that includes attacks on Israel by Hezbollah militants and attacks on Lebanon by Israel targeting the militants, the U.S.-born Pope Leo was asked if he would "use his connections" with U.S. President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to promote peace in the region.

"I believe sustainable peace is achievable," the pope said. "In fact, I've already, in a very small way, begun a few conversations with some leaders of places you mentioned," he told the reporter.

The Vatican's diplomatic efforts, though, take place mostly "behind the scenes," he said. The important thing is that those involved in armed conflict silence their weapons and sit at the same table to negotiate peace. 

On the question of Ukraine and U.S. President Donald Trump's proposed peace plan, which was drafted without the input of European members of NATO, Pope Leo said he was happy to see that revisions to the plan already were being made to include Europe's concerns.

Asked about the ongoing tensions between Trump and Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, Pope Leo said the Vatican is in contact with "the bishops and the nuncio" in trying to find ways "to calm the situation," especially because the people suffering most are the simple citizens of Venezuela.

However, Pope Leo also noted that "the voices coming from the United States keep changing," alternating between ultimatums to Maduro and the occasional softening of the rhetoric.

"I don't know more," the pope said, but it is always better to seek the path of dialogue.

Responding to another question about dialogue and friendship, Pope Leo said his episcopal motto, "In Illo Uno Unum," literally "In the One, we are one," is an obvious reference to the unity found with faith in Christ. 

But it also is "an invitation to all of us and to others to say, 'The more we can promote authentic unity and understanding, respect and human relationships -- so friendship and dialogue in the world -- the greater possibility there is that we will put aside the arms of war," the pope said.

When people learn to "leave aside the distrust, the hatred, the animosity that has so often been built up," he said, "we will find ways to come together and be able to promote authentic peace and justice."

As far as the conclave that elected him May 8, the pope said he holds "very strictly" to the secrecy of the election process.

The day before the conclave began, he said, a reporter stopped him on the street and asked what he thought about people saying he was a candidate.

"I simply said, 'Everything is in the hands of God,' and I believe that profoundly," the pope said.

Pope Leo said people who want to understand him should read the book "The Practice of the Presence of God" by an author known only as Brother Lawrence; it has influenced his spirituality for years, he said. The premise is "one simply gives his life to the Lord and allows the Lord to lead."

"In the midst of great challenges, living in Peru during years of terrorism, being called to serve in places where I never thought I'd be called to serve, I trust in God," he said.

"When I saw how things were going" in the conclave, he said, "I took a deep breath. I said, 'Here we go, Lord. You are in charge, and you lead the way.'" 

As for the crowds that gather in Rome and turned out on the trip, Pope Leo said he knows they are coming to see him, "but I say to myself, 'They are here because they want to see Jesus Christ, and they want to see a messenger of peace.'"

The enthusiasm, especially of young people, "is awe-inspiring," he said, "and I just hope I never tire of appreciating" that.

As for future papal trips, he said, there is nothing "certain" yet, but he hopes his next trip will be to Africa, including Algeria where St. Augustine served as bishop and where he still "is very respected as a son of the nation."

"Just to confirm," he said: "Africa. Africa. Africa."

Rumors had been flying that he would head to Peru, where he had served as a missionary and bishop for 20 years, and to Argentina and Uruguay, countries that had been promised a visit by Pope Francis.

"But the plan still has not been finalized," he said.