While there has been a tendency in the United Sates "to hyper-stress separation of church and state," Bishop Robert Barron said "the roots of our country are deeply religious" and "the basic principles of the country are inescapably religious."
On May 17, thousands gathered on the National Mall in Washington, D.C., for the White House event celebrating "one nation under God" and "the connection between religion and our American democracy," Barron said.
In an interview with EWTN News' Colm Flynn ahead of the event, Barron discussed the "hugely important" phrase "one nation under God."
"In the written versions of the Gettysburg Address that [Abraham Lincoln] prepared before giving it, the phrase 'under God' is not there," Barron explained.
"But then when he was delivering it he added ... 'under God,'" Barron said. "I think it represented a deep intuition that Lincoln had that you can't really understand our democracy without it."
The phrase "under God" is "meant to hold off tyranny," he said. It is clear that "all kings and all rulers are under God, meaning under the judgment and authority of God. Our founders understood that."
"And that little phrase is meant to hold off that tendency to deify any political establishment, political party, political ruler. We're a nation, yes indeed, but we're under God. Our laws are determined by God," he said.
"I love the First Amendment to our Constitution, which in its opening lines expresses very eloquently … the right balance," he said. "Namely, 'Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion.'"
"But then there's a second part, the second clause of that: 'Congress shall make no law limiting the free exercise of religion,'" he said.
"That's an eloquent balance. So there's no officially state-sanctioned religion, but that does not mean that religion has no role in public life. On the contrary, because there should be no law restricting the free exercise of religion," Barron said.
Catholics' role in public life and public office
Catholics in public office should bring "moral sensibility into their public decisions," Barron said.
"We're not here to impose Catholicism on anybody," he said. "But I think to bring a moral and spiritual sensibility into the decisions that you make at these high levels is altogether valid."
As a member of the White House Religious Liberty Commission, Barron said he met "lots of Catholics in the present administration" and told them to "bring Thomas Aquinas into your public life."
"By which I mean bring these great moral and spiritual principles that indeed undergird our democracy, but make them a lively presence in the work that you do," he said.
Barron further spoke about his time on the White House commission, where he received both criticism and praise.
When asked to be a commissioner, "my first reaction was very positive," Barron said. "I thought … 'They're inviting a Catholic bishop to be a voice around the table in the formulation of this policy. Why would I say no?'"
To say no would be "taking a Catholic voice away from that process," he said.
"I'm not implementing the policy. I'm making suggestions regarding the formulation of policy," Barron explained. "The president could take or leave what we say … So I'm not implementing the president's policies. I'm helping to shape public policy."
"The commission was great. I spoke my mind in every setting. No one censored me," said Barron, who was present at a White House Holy Week event when Pentecostal pastor Paula Cain White compared the president's suffering to Jesus Christ's.
Barron said he was able to address issues within the administration, specifically about Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) "detainees in Chicago having access to sacraments and pastoral care."
The bishop took the matter to Homeland Security and "no one questioned" him. It was "a religious liberty issue," because "people have a right to their sacraments and pastoral care," he said.
Barron also spoke out in regard to the president's "critical remarks about the pope."
"I said in an X post that I have deep admiration for the president in regard to religion. He's done wonderful things. But I said I think that was a disrespectful way to talk to the pope," Barron said.
"In regards to prudential judgment," a president can "disagree with the pope," Barron said. "But the pope is not ... just an ordinary hack politician that you can sort of talk in that flippant way to."

"He's the vicar of Christ, successor of Peter. He's our Holy Father. And I just felt that was disrespectful, and I thought it was not a constructive contribution to the conversation," he said.
"He's the Holy Father, so we have a filial relationship to him. He's a father, we're like children … we have a family relationship to the pope. So it's different than just our relationship to a political leader."
"At the level of principle and the moral values that ought to be informing our life … we abide by what the pope is saying, but I think there can be disagreement at the prudential level," Barron said.
Dividing issues in the nation today
Amid numerous wars right now, Barron said "we should study" the just war tradition.
It offers "very useful criteria, and I think the Church's job is to bring these to consciousness and urge political leaders to apply them," he said.
"The Catechism of the Catholic Church says that when it comes to the evaluation and application of the criteria, that belongs to the civil authorities. And I think there's great wisdom there too."
Barron also spoke to the ongoing matters with U.S. immigration enforcement.
"A completely open border invites a lot of moral chaos, and a lot of catastrophe happens because of an open border. So the Church recognizes the legitimacy of that," Barron said. "At the same time, the Church wants us to welcome the stranger and to be open to those who are in great need and those who are seeking refuge."
ICE "is a very legitimate expression of the government's authority, but … I think ICE is way too blunt a tool to use to solve the general issue of people in the country illegally," Barron said.
"I think a political solution has to be found. I don't think ICE is the right instrument to do that," he said. "I'd invite people who are intimately involved in these things to have a good, morally informed conversation about it and come to good prudential judgments."
"I'm not an expert in immigration policy, and I'm not an expert in the economics that are prevailing on the ground in various situations," he said. "I think we have to inform all those who are making those decisions, make sure they have a keen moral sensibility, [and] know what the principles are."
"But I think people of goodwill can, and obviously do, disagree about how they are applied … concretely," he said.



