The USCCB Conference, reopening the government, and an interview with Kat Armas

Heidi, Daniel, and David do a deep dive into the recent Bishops' Conference, and we look at the ongoing fallout from the government shutdown as the country struggles to reopen. Then Heidi interviews Kat Armas about the spirituality of resisting empire during Advent

INTRO

Heidi is traveling to visit colleagues at Commonweal

Daniel and David are traveling to Boston to take part in the AAR/SBL Conference

SCRIPT

The Accessorized Bible

Ilea Delio

SEGMENT 1 - The USCCB Conference

Heidi’s overview for Commonweal: https://www.commonwealmagazine.org/bishops-statement-immigration-falls-short

Fr. Tom Reese at RNS

The ERD

Daniel’s column about the flawed position of the bishops’ conference

Aleja Hetzler-McCain at RNS reporting on nurses - https://religionnews.com/2025/11/13/as-nurses-call-for-better-conditions-us-bishops-ban-trans-care-at-catholic-hospitals/

https://religionnews.com/2025/11/13/catholic-bishops-decry-treatment-of-migrants-without-mentioning-trump/

“You Are Not Alone” program

SEGMENT 2 - The reopening of the government

Overview of the reopening

Mutual aid

Subsidiarity

Pope Leo XIV’s exhortation

The role of the government is the promotion of the common good

SEGMENT 3 - Interview with Kat Armas

TRANSCRIPTS

INTRO

DAULT: Hello and welcome to the Francis Effect Podcast. My name is David Dalt. I host a radio show called Things Not Seen about Culture and Faith, and I'm an assistant professor of Christian Spirituality at the Institute of Pastoral Studies at Loyola University Chicago. I'm here with my dear friends Heidi Schlump and Dan Harran.

Heidi is an award-winning journalist and senior correspondent at Common Wheel Magazine. She is also part-time faculty member at Loyola University Chicago. . Dan is Professor of Philosophy, religious studies and theology at St. Mary's College in Notre Dame, Indiana. He's also a regular columnist at National Catholic Reporter.

Every couple of weeks we get together to discuss news and events through a lens of our shared Catholic faith. Dan and Heidi, welcome to you both. Heidi. How have you been?

SCHLUMPF: I'm doing great. I'm, you know, two weeks into my new job and love, love, loving it. It's such a great team at Common Wheel that I'm working with and I've just had the chance to write some cool things that you'll see in the future. And I was able to cover the Bishop's Conference even though from afar.

So I am excited that we're gonna be talking about that. The other cool thing about working for Common is that I occasionally get to go to New York. So I'm going to New York next week. I know you guys are traveling too. I wish I was. Joining you in Boston. But I'm looking forward to connecting with the Commonwealth folks and with some other people in New York.

So shout out to anybody in New York who wants to try to meet with me. I hope to be going somewhat regularly and getting ready for the holidays and not feeling so stressed. So here's to that. Also there's some scuttlebutt that some of the ice agents might be leaving Chicago and I'm like. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

I don't wish them on any other city, but it would be nice to see things settle down a little bit here. I've been really encouraged by how Chicagoans have stepped up to defend their neighbors. So I continue to pray for that. How about you, Dan? I know you're gonna be getting on a plane soon too.

HORAN: Yeah. At least two thirds of us will be heading shipping up to Boston as the Drop Kit Murphy's would say. But in the meantime, we've had here in the bend, in South Bend a full experience of winter already. The LA Nina. Weather system that's scheduled to bring a lot of moisture to the Midwest and east coast this winter.

So buckle up is arriving already. So we had about 13 inches of snow Sunday night into Monday, and then a little bit more Monday to Tuesday. And that just kind of really hit us pretty hard. As somebody who grew up in up upstate New York, I was used to it, but it is always interesting to see. How various people handle that kind of winter weather land. But yeah, as you mentioned, Heidi I'm going to Boston, I know as is David for the annual American Academy of Religion Conference. It's always right, quite an experience. I'm excited to, to see David in person. I'm sure we're gonna, we're gonna connect and to see other friends and colleagues though for the last couple years.

I have found myself on a number of boards of professional societies and editorial boards. And so what that means is at a a r you just have from about seven o'clock in the morning to about seven o'clock at night. Meetings. So I haven't actually been able to present or visit you know, panels of academic papers I would say in the last two years to the degree that I would like to otherwise.

So, it's important to. You know, serve your time and to serve the guild and to do good work. And I have wonderful colleagues that I work with. So I don't begrudge any of that, but it is a busy couple days for sure. So I won't be able to see much of Boston. Most of it'll be spent inside hotels and conference centers, and I've seen David nod his head on this audio medium.

So, David, why don't I toss it to you? What are you looking forward to? And I know a, a r is one of them.

DAULT: Yeah. Well, I am definitely looking forward to getting a chance to see you and other people that I only ever see at this conference. You know, when I'm able to go. Like you, I have responsibilities there. I'm the president of an A-A-R-S-B-L adjacent society called script. And so I will be chairing several meetings that are, sessions that are gonna be going on there where people will be giving papers.

We'll be honoring one of the co-founders of the organization that I am the president of. And so I have a lot of responsibilities. And also just a chance to catch up with my editor from Yale. Jennifer Banks and to really get a chance to thank her for shepherding my book through the process, the long and torturous process that it has gone through.

Not torturous because of their end, but just because I rewrote the thing four times. But but I that, on that note, just to say, I also now have a box full of now nine of the 10 physical copies of the book because I have sent one off to the head of my dissertation committee just to thank him from way back in the day for helping me to think and do all these things.

But I, I also want to give a shout out to my colleagues at IPS, especially my colleague Heidi Russell. Because she organized earlier this week a colloquy with a visiting scholar who is at Loyola this year, IA Delio. I believe that she's someone that is known to both of you.

She took an hour and a half and talked to us about her new book, and we had just a. Fascinating conversation. The IPS faculty and her, and I was, I felt so thrilled to be part of that conversation. And this is really what I love about being an academic is the chance to think with people. So I'm looking forward to all of that.

And Dan, I know that you know IA Delio pretty well.

HORAN: Yeah, full disclosure, she's a dear friend and a mentor of mine. She was my master's thesis director a million years ago in Washington, DC and yeah it, she does tremendous work, is always kind of on the cutting edge pushing the boundaries of theology. She's one of those super scholars who actually has.

Two PhDs, one in science and one in historical theology. One from Rutgers, one from Fordham. So, yeah, she's a powerhouse and a great person and a yeah I have no doubt, I'm not surprised in the least to hear that you guys had a great conversation.

DAULT: Well, and as we're looking ahead and thinking about what all is on our travel docket coming up in the next few weeks now's a good time to tell you about what's gonna be happening on the show because we will be discussing among other things the reopening of the FA. A and the hopeful return to normal airspace here in the country.

But before we get to that, we're gonna start in our first segment talking about the recent bishops Conference that just concluded, and we'll be sort of giving a recap and thinking about what the impact of some of the decisions and statements that came out of that will be. That's in our first segment and our second segment.

We're gonna be talking broadly about the government reopening and looking at how that will go over the next couple of weeks, and then in our third segment. Heidi interviews Kat Armas, and they're gonna be talking about the spirituality of resisting empire during the season of Advent. So all of that is coming up here on the Francis Effect.

Please stay with us.

SEGMENT 1

DAULT: Welcome back to The Francis Effect. I'm David Dat, and I'm here with Dan Horan and Heidi Schlump. Every couple of weeks we get together to discuss a variety of topics from a perspective informed by our Catholic faith. Last week, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, better known as the U-S-C-C-B gathered in Baltimore for its annual fall meeting while every year the bishops address pressing issues and internal policy concerns.

This year's meeting was significant for a number of reasons. First, the leadership of the conference was slated to change. Every three years the bishops elect a president, vice president, and other committee chairs, and this was an election year. Who is nominated and who is ultimately elected is closely watched and often interpreted as a clue into the CB's current ideological and political makeup.

Second, given the crisis of the Trump administration's immigration enforcement and deportation efforts, which fly in the face of the Catholic Church's clear and consistent moral teaching, many were expecting the bishops to issue some kind of statement of rebuke In the past, the U-S-C-C-B has been reluctant to cross the Trump administration with the statements critical of the first and second Trump administrations under previous two U-S-C-C-B presidents reading as slaps on the wrist without ever mentioning Trump by name. This is in contrast to the CB's consistent naming of democratic presidents, specifically in statements attacking policies or positions the bishops disagree with during the Obama and Biden administrations.

Third, given efforts in recent years within some U-S-C-C-B committees and pressure from certain bishops, it was largely expected that the conference would adopt proposals to amend its ethical and religious directives for Catholic Healthcare Services to prohibit gender affirmative treatment at Catholic hospitals.

This text is understood to provide Catholic hospitals with authoritative guidance on ethical matters. These changes were approved and hospitals are now instructed. Not to perform any medical interventions, quote that aim to transform sexual characteristics of a human body into those of the opposite sex unquote.

Dan, these are three significant developments. Where should we begin with each?

HORAN: How much time do we have again, David? That's the question. You know, these are the three sort of headline items that came out of the fall meeting, and as you said, David going into the meeting, these were things that were on the radar of journalists and observers of the US Bishops Conference. So in many ways not surprising.

I think we can take each of these in turn maybe, but I'll just offer some initial thoughts about each of the three sort of buckets, the three sort of headlines. The first is not really surprising to see Archbishop Coakley from Oklahoma be elected.

The president of the Bishop's Conference, he had been the secretary or the number three in the leadership for the last three years. The number two, Archbishop Lori is too old to serve in that position. That's not a, an ageism remark. It's just a matter of canon law that bishops who are going to turn 75 within the perspective, tenure or time of their holding of office are not eligible for that position. So, that left of the previous administration the number three to be considered. There's been a lot of talk about what that means for the conference. I think I tend to agree with a lot of commentators and observers who make the point that.

And this is really a sign of the Bishop's Conference's, desire for continuity with the previous to U-S-C-C-B administration. So that's Archbishop Gomez out of Los Angeles and Archbishop Rollo of the US Military Archdiocese. And these have been leaders and, or, you know, administrations of the US Bishops Conference that has been.

Very favorable. As you mentioned in, in the opening of the segment to the Trump administration, if not overtly, then certainly tacitly have treated democratic politicians one way, have treated Republican politicians another way. And we've seen in the second Trump administration that there are a number of bishops, including the Archbishop of New York and the Bishop of Wynona in in Minnesota, who have taken formal positions of advising and leadership in the Trump administration on religious matters.

This is quite striking. This is significant. There was some sort of a mixed bag in who was elected to chair various committees. And I see there a greater, we might call it ideological or ecclesiastically political diversity among the leaders there. And we can talk about some of those specifics if you'd like.

The kind of runner up who was elected vice president, Bishop Daniel Flores from Texas is seen by a lot of people as more moderate. If we want to use these kind of political terms but nevertheless holds a lot of kind of traditionalist views, particularly when it comes to things like, like sexuality and gender and the role of women in the church.

And I think if we look at. who was sort of leading the race as it were among the 10 candidates and who was eventually elected to these positions. While Bishop Flores is not really a culture warrior in the traditional mold of some of his colleagues there are definitely people in that top three who are so I'm curious, maybe we can stick with that.

What you two thought about the elections.

SCHLUMPF: Well, I guess I would just say I think a lot of Catholics have stopped looking to the US Bishop's Conference for guidance on things. And are not paying that close attention to like, who's elected vice president or even president. But that said, yeah, I would agree with you and other commentators who see Coley and Flores as not exactly.

Any sort of major shift. Flores, if you recall, was the head of the doctrine committee when they came out with that statement about transgender people. And we'll talk a little bit more about that now that it's been incorporated into the ethical and religious directives. So yeah, I mean, to be fair.

Coakley has been outspoken about the death penalty especially in his state, Oklahoma, where they do have executions fairly regularly. So, he's been good on that issue in that sense. He has a consistent ethic of life. But he's, you know, his association with the Napa Institute and previous positions that he's taken, I mean, a lot of people.

Put a lot of stock into the fact that he was supportive of Archbishop Vio when VIO was attacking Pope Francis and that he hasn't rescinded that. You know, in fact he was asked that specifically in an interview, I believe yesterday with America Magazine, and he did not. Rescind it still. It was a weird answer.

So yeah, and I will, you know, I just think a lot of people will not be looking to the leadership of the U-S-C-C-B for leadership, I once wrote a story and asked, I believe Tom Reese about father Tom Reese, a columnist at Religion News Service about like the number of conservative versus liberal bishops in the conference.

And he's like, there aren't any liberal bishops, you know, I mean, there's moderate and then there's conservative. So that's what we're seeing.

HORAN: Can I just comment on that? And this might bridge the third topic that we come back to, which is the directives amendment that you've mentioned High. ID which is, you know, I've worked very closely with a lot of bishops as a theological advisor, particularly around some of these issues that are quote unquote hot button and that, that are reflected in the sort of culture war mentality of some of the bishops in the United States.

Not all of them. In fact, I would say the vast majority of the US bishops would fall into what you're describing using Tom Reese's language as moderate. And what that means is and I think that's the best way to think about this. We have a problem if there was a liberal bishop in a conservative bishop.

'cause you're going to ideological extremes. You know, I think of the Billy Joel song, why do I Go to Extremes? Right? And we see that play out most often on the right, right. With the current composition of the conference. You see that with people like the former Bishop of Tyler, Texas Joseph Strickland among others.

But what I wanna say is, I think the dividing line, in my experience working with a lot of bishops and continuing to do so, is that the difference is not really. You know, mapped on in a political divide, but it's about what I would call an epistemological divide. Which of the bishops have the humility to listen and to learn?

That to me is the real divide. There are some bishops who want to learn about things that. They're not familiar with who, who that might be things that are hot button issues in the culture. That might be something like immigration policy or you know, foreign policy that might be things like transgender or non-binary identities or intersex experiences.

It may be what the experience of women in the church is like, you know, or what the experience of religious in the church is like, as opposed to maybe diocesan clergy or the laity. So I. For me, I think that's the biggest thing. When you have the strongest sort of culture warrior mentality that's expressed we code it as conservative or we code it as traditional, but what I see it as is close-minded and shut off.

And to me that's the most dangerous thing.

SCHLUMPF: Yeah, and I'll just acknowledge too the limitations and the problematic use of political labels in, you know, church context. But I think one of the problems is that, and I'll agree with you that it's a different approach. I think Pope Francis. Us once talked about like deductive versus inductive kind of approaches.

But I also think that it's hard when you have a group that's supposedly representing, you know, the US church. And then like you said, you have people over on the extremes on the right. And then you have some people in the middle, but there's nobody in an extreme on the left. And I'm not saying the extremes are good things, but they're not very representative if there's nobody on that side,

HORAN: Well, maybe just one last note there too. 'cause you bring up a really good point that if the only extreme that's represented is the far right, then the moderates look like the far left. Right. And I think this is something I've experienced in my own life, both previously in religious life, in an ordained ministry and as a lathe theologian, is that the perception I think some people have of me from the far right is that I'm some kind of far leftist, which is just simply not the case.

You know, people I often say. People would be surprised to realize how much more progressive I am than they think, and how much more conservative I am than they think. And I think that kind of summarizes what we're calling the kind of moderate camp or the maybe the silent majority of many of the US bishops.

DAULT: Well, I'm gonna add my perspective as a far leftist in a way that I hope will compliment what the the comments so far have brought us to. Longtime listeners know that I spend a lot of time kind of pouring over Canon law, and one of the things that I have gone down the rabbit hole on more than once is the role of bishops and the limitations on the power of bishops and the ways in which bishops sometimes exercise rhetorical powers that they don't actually have.

And I've spent a lot of time thinking about what national conferences actually are for and what actual powers they might have in terms of. Magisterial influence or control, and the answer is not much. But like all major institutions in the American context, whether we're talking about academic institutions or whether we're talking about government institutions or we're talking about religious institutions, if you get to a certain size, it's no longer conservative or liberal.

It is all institutions ratchet towards neoliberalism. Which is a weird hybrid of both, and that means that all large institutions are very comfortable with standing for market solutions to problems large and small. So this helps to explain, I think the U-S-C-C-B speaking out very stridently 12 years ago.

On what they saw as a socialization of healthcare, but also a willingness to speak out very strongly on the most invasive and personal of healthcare matters for people who are already being beset upon by major forces in the American political and social landscape, transgender people. And so I simply just want to name this and say, when the Bishops Conference gets together, it is a group of individual bishops, each of whom has control in their own individual. Diocese, and that is where their influence begins and ends because when they speak as a national body, they are not speaking for the universal church.

And so th they don't have the kind of power of an entire college of bishops coming together. Even though there is a kind of paper effect here, a rhetorical effect, it does have real material effects because their health advisory now is going to change and solidify certain practices at hospitals.

And we need to be constantly, I think, naming the material effects of what are happening here. They didn't speak out to really push back against the material effects against immigrants. They did speak out in ways that will really materially affect Matthew 25, the least of these, among us in our current political and social situation.

HORAN: Maybe if I can just circle back and David, you're sort of introducing, I think a good segue to another topic, which is the statement on, or the adoption of the amendments to the healthcare directive. But I just wanna circle back to the point about what would be called technically in, in theology.

And as you rightly know, to canon law, ordinary magisterium, which is the teaching authority of. The local bishop and that can be exercised basically on, on two levels, right? The Pope has universal ordinary magistarium so that when he teaches, like Pope Leo did last month with an apostolic exhortation, that teaching is binding and relevant in all dioceses in all local churches in the world.

Local bishops. So the bishop here in Fort Wayne, south Bend, Kevin Rhodes, or the Archbishop of Chicago, where you two are Cardinal sopi. They exercise or ordinary magisterium, as David rightly said, within the confines of their geographic diocese. And only there Cardinal. Well, that's complicated 'cause he's a metropolitan.

But let's just say Kevin Rhodes does not have any authority in the Diocese of Kalamazoo, for instance, in Michigan or. Pick your other place. Right. But you're right, David. I think there's a perception issue with the US Conference of bishops, just like bishops conferences regionally or nationally around the world.

In that they don't actually exercise any kind of magisterium. Collectively, what they choose to do when they issue a statement like this is the bishops themselves can adopt those statements as as a teaching in their local church. Right? And there are people who abstain and. Decline to support statements that has been controversial in the past, particularly in the early aughts, which is like old history.

Some of our listeners weren't even born yet, perhaps. But nevertheless, I think that's an important thing to say because the US Conference of Catholic Bishops essentially serves three purposes. One. It's an advocacy wing, right? So they, they advocate for various things, kind of like lobbying, both in a literal political sense, but also in a softer sense maybe in terms of moral teaching and charity and the like.

They're an administrative body, right? So they have staff that helps you know, pool resources for diocese around the country and distribute those resources as needed as well as kind of fund nationwide Catholic initiatives, like what is now. Formerly known as Catholic News Service, for instance, right?

So there's that, and then primarily what they serve as we see playing out this past week is a public relations arm for the Catholic church in the us. So these statements, the press conferences, these sorts of things, they don't bear the same sort of teaching authority. That a local bishop issuing a statement in his diocese or the Pope himself for the glo, for the Universal Church would.

But they do have these kind of soft political impacts and they do become a sort of lightning rod as we've seen for good and for ill right of kind of pinpointing, this is our quote unquote authoritative voice. It's not authoritative in a magisterial sense, but it's authoritative insofar as it gathers kind of national PR and newsworthiness.

DAULT: And I appre thank you for those sort of added layers to what I'm trying to say because I agree 100% with everything that you're bringing into the conversation. I want to, I wanna steer us back towards these material effects just briefly. So gender affirming care has been sort of mischaracterized in Catholic dialogue as this scare tactic, slogan, gender ideology.

And so let's talk materially about what it means. So in Lato Sea Pope Francis rightly says, we can't look to technologies as a salvific measure, right? Technologies will not save us. We need to improve our relationships, both with. Human to human, but also to non-human entities and to the world. The eco the ecosphere.

So yes, technology's not gonna save us, nevertheless, in this conversation. I am a person who wears glasses. Everyone in this conversation is a person who wears glasses. My life has been vastly improved by a technology that I then. Put onto my body that changes my appearance and changes the way that I relate to the world, but improves my ability to maneuver myself in the world.

It means I don't run into things. It means that I'm a safer person to be around. All of these things are net benefits from the technology that I put on my face. But now imagine that. Someone, the church or the government were to say, well, this technology is available if you have brown eyes and if you have blue eyes, but it's not available if you have green eyes.

Okay. Those people can never access this technology and that's largely and I hate to break it down to being that simplistic, but that's largely what we're experiencing here with regard to gender affirming care. It is. It is care that people who are identified as cis, who are identified as having typical sexual presentation can access with no problem at all.

In fact, oftentimes they are encouraged to access it, but when a person who is saying. I have a certain existential situation that pulls me into wanting to access this technology. Suddenly the church decides to step up and say, sorry, you have green eyes, no glasses for you. You're gonna have to bump into things for the rest of your life.

Now, I want listeners to. To try and think about the material effects in that simple a manner. And literally right now we are saying the hospitals will give this care to certain people who appear in certain ways with certain colors of eyes, if you will, but we will not give it to others. And that to me is using Pope Francis' very correct sort of language about not wanting to put our trust into technology and.

Forgive me, perverting it to a harmful purpose. A purpose that is against what I would say is sort of available to us in Matthew 25 and in other scripture that tells us that we need to be creating spaces of safety. And welcome for everyone, todos Todos Todos, not simply for the people that we think deserve it.

I'd be interested to hear y'all's thoughts, but that's where I'm gonna plant my flag today.

SCHLUMPF: let me just say that I listened to the presentation about the revisions to the ERDs or ethical and religious directives. There was very little. Discussion. So it was clear that had all been either discussed behind closed doors, or pretty much decided, you know, two years ago when they did the statement that came out of doctrine, the committee on doctrine.

Was it two years ago? One year ago. I.

HORAN: Yeah,

SCHLUMPF: No sense of time anymore that, that pretty much outlined, you know, that's what they thought about this. And now it's just being codified in these directives, which as you mentioned, Dan, have to be promulgated by each bishop in his diocese. I don't know of any.

Bishops that don't promulgate the ERDs. However they also made some changes to a couple, one of the directives that had to do with abortion. But again, I haven't done enough reporting on this to understand. Exactly what the changes are and what they will mean. But but yeah, they're very concerning in that they seem to get in the way between a doctor and patient about what's best for that patient.

And there is some concern that even people with. Quote unquote blue eyes, meaning like women who are just taking hormones for other reasons might not be able to be treated at a Catholic hospital and continue that treatment. Again, I haven't seen the fine print about this. hear. That the bishops consulted widely in doing these directives, which they announced the four groups that they consulted with at the meeting.

My understanding is I've not heard that they actually consulted with an actual transgender person yet.

HORAN: No, my understanding is they did not, and they, I would just say, I'm not gonna break any confidences. But I'm familiar with some of, you know, there's something about something like over the last four years, almost seven drafts of this updating. And I know people who are very involved in that. And not in a way, not unlike open wide our hearts.

The really inadequate document on racism from a number of years ago, 2018 now, I believe it was. A lot of the most competent, most grounded, most experiential advice that was given to the committee was ultimately not taken up. And this includes advice from Catholic organizations that are, that have a responsibility for healthcare, that we're involved in the consultancy stages, who strongly advised under several different leaders in that.

Organizations strongly advise the bishops to consult with physicians with trans and non-binary and intersex people. And like you, Heidi, it is my understanding that never came to fruition, which has been a longstanding criticism. It's something I've raised, it's something other theologians and ethicists have raised.

It's something advocates like the great folks at New Ways Ministry have raised and pointed out. and, And quite frankly it's, it's a scandal. This, the document in 2023, I, my column was titled as I Assessed it when it first came out. I think the title is something like the US Bishops document.

On healthcare is a disaster. I'm very proud to say, by the way, I don't, I'm not a big fan of awards but that did win a first place Catholic Media Association award the following year. And the CMA is not a progressive liberal organization. Right. I bring that up because sometimes I get this kind of flack from people about you know, you're just kind of off on the, on, on your own little planet there.

But the truth is it was a disaster. It was. You know, expressed in bad theology, it's expressed in, you know, it expresses bad science, it expresses bad anthropology, and this is what we see now adopted in a concrete way to David's really good point about the material impacts people's lives will be affected by this.

This is not a joke, and I am really, I'm gonna be very frank here. I'm really sick and tired of anybody who wants to claim to be pro-life. And adopts any kind of transphobic or homophobic attitude and let alone policy in this way that's gonna prohibit life-saving resources and healthcare for people. How dare you.

How you know they should be ashamed to call themselves pro-life. And I know we still wanna talk about the immigration statement and about how that is in so many ways, inadequate. And I think this raises another question. Where is the courage of the gospel? Pope Francis talked about this and the joy of the gospel, but it's also courageous where is the courage of the gospel?

That Pope Leo just last month told the whole church that if you find yourself not able to love your neighbor, if you find yourself struggling in this, you need to reread the gospel. A direct quote from Pope Leo I am just, it's astonishing to me that the most vulnerable, the most poor among us, the most.

Precarious are the ones who are constantly being, you know, targeted and you know, who are suffering and are suffering even at the hands of religious leaders. I guess one question I'll leave 'cause there's so much more I have to say and I'll say more in, in other outlets about this, but you know, the question that begs for me is, you know, what business, what value add to use a corporate phrase or question, does the Catholic mission of these hospitals actually provide.

When now we're excluding people deliberately from healthcare, right? If this was on the grounds of race or eye color, to use David's metaphor from earlier, you know, then this would be so obvious to people. So I don't know maybe it's time for these, you know, to be not-for-profit hospitals that, that no longer bear a Catholic mission.

I'm not sure. But I think, you know, if what we're doing is prioritizing what is actually a gender ideology, which is imposing a kind of abstraction onto people's lived experiences which is what I see play out in these documents then, I don't know maybe it's a question that should be asked.

SCHLUMPF: Well, and I'll just point to the reporting of Aleah Hertzler McCain, former of. NCR now of religion news service. She was at the Bishop's Conference and did great stories on all of these issues that we're talking about, but she's the only person who covered the nurses from Ascension and other Catholic healthcare.

Conglomerates protesting outside the meeting around issues of unionization and working conditions that affect possibly safety at Catholic hospitals. So there's another Catholic teaching on healthcare, but were the bishops discussing or voting or having directives or anything on that? Or calling, you know, their other Catholic institutions to task?

You know, I just, it's so clear that again the. Pelvic issues are all we care about. You know, we mentioned that Bishop Strickland, who was in, in the meeting room for this meeting, he's been outdoors, I think for the last couple years, who has been, you know, removed from his diocese. But was attending this meeting and stood up in the middle of this discussion about this and said, well, as long as we're talking about doctrine, I wanna complain about a priest who confirmed a man who is L gb, who's L-G-B-T-Q.

And it was just like, I mean, he didn't use the term L-G-B-T-Q, he was pointing to Father Jim Martin specifically, and the. President kind of just like moved along and didn't even address that, but like who, who cares about that? That he's allowed to enter the church even if he's, you know, in, you know, married to another man.

But the nurses who are calling on church, teaching about the dignity of work and the right to unionize that doesn't get covered. So, or it doesn't get, it gets covered by r and s, but it didn't get talked about by the bishops.

DAULT: I'm certain that Bishop Strickland probably has not heard yet about the recent dining experiences of Pope Leo. Several transgender people, but when that percolates back to him, I'm very eager to hear his thoughts. But let's shift gears slightly here.

HORAN: Just in fairness, David, I'm not interested in hearing his thoughts on that.

DAULT: enough. Okay.

HORAN: You can gimme the summary.

DAULT: Charity in all things. But let's shift gears here.

So, in reporting on this last night, national Public Radio said that they had expected that the statement on immigration would be somewhat prophetic, but instead they saw it more as pastoral and having a much softer tone. I'd love to hear y'all's thoughts on the statement that actually made it out of the conference on immigration.

SCHLUMPF: Well, I'll go first 'cause I just wrote about this for Common Wheel and we can share a link to that in the show notes. The headline says that the statement falls short. And I know there are a lot of people who are praising the fact. That the bishops did at least have a statement and they spoke out about immigration, given what's going on in our country.

I mean, just, we don't need to remind our listeners that like it's horrific, masked people without identification, grabbing people, throwing them to the ground, racially, profiling them, children, separating families. It's just. Insane out there with this idea that even people who are here legally and are following the laws about trying to become naturalized citizens here are being, you know, and then taken to detention centers with horrific conditions, possibly shipped off to countries that aren't even their home country.

And so the bishops did have a statement. Yes, but it's clear from the statement both it's brevity, it's 600 some words, and what it doesn't say, it never mentions Trump, the administration ice and their tactics. It's clear that in order to get the. Quote unquote Unity that everybody's so excited about or some Catholic commentators are excited about.

They had to water it down and for it not to be too strong. And a couple bishops pushed back on that Cardinal Soch who wanted a stronger sentence added at the last minute. Bishop Cantu who said he had hoped for something stronger. You know, again, it's good. That they did it. And I know it provides some encouragement, but I don't know what will happen beyond the statement.

And even Bishop Sys who did have a stronger presentation the day before on Tuesday, although no discussion afterwards. Again, this was another issue that was completely discussed for the MO behind closed doors and executive session. But it's clear from what came out of it that some bishops did not want this, or a very strong statement, and so they made it.

Balanced, quote unquote.

HORAN: Yeah. I mean, if you want something to die, send it to committee, right? That's the old expression. You know, that things get worked over and then they become nothing. And I think the exact word count as NCR reported it was 618 words, which means that. The bishops put together a very mediocre, very lukewarm document that is not even as long as the assignments that my first year students in college have to do on a daily class basis.

So, you know, I think there's more homework that needs to be done. But to your point, Heidi, about, you know, the use of executive session in this case was not to talk about things that are private, that are personal, that are confidential, but this is to protect. The reputations of some of these bishops in the eyes of their Republican comrades.

And, you know, I'll just, for the purposes of you know, biblical authority, I'll just cite the Gospel of Luke, which is what is done in the darkness will be seen in the light. And I, whether that's the light of, you know, individual judgment before God, or whether that's the light of some really good investigative journalism the rationale.

That leads to the watering down of statements for One's personal comfort, such that the cowardice leads to talking about this behind closed doors when, as you rightly say, our fellow sisters and brothers and other siblings are being violently taken from the streets. Taken from their homes, taken from their places of work, from their schools is again, another failure.

It's an absolute moral failure. And so I'm glad there's some statement. And you're right. I think there's been such a hunger, such a thirst from any kind of religious authority in this country to speak out in one voice and going back to a previous comment, what does a Bishop's Conference and National Bishops Conference do?

It provides a PR outlet. And so insofar as that's the case. Secular media picked up on this, but it has been, as you rightly said, Heidi, and you wrote a really great piece in Common Wheel that was just published in addition to the others that you've mentioned that have highlighted, you know, this, there's something missing here.

Right? There's a privation of the real moral. Fortitude and courage that our religious leaders should have. I mean, I'm I was just teaching in one of my courses the writings of Osca Oscar Romero. And, you know, for students who were born many decades after his assassination and after the Civil War in El Salvador you know, it's hard not to think about.

Courageous leaders like him in the church. And one of the things that some of my students highlighted that they were really impressed by was his experience of, we might call it radical in the best way to the gospel. His gospel conversion took place really in the last three years of his life.

And so there's always an opportunity and in, in that regard, my prayers are for that our brothers in baptism who happen to wear pectoral crosses and miters that they too experience if they are, you know, afraid to be. Courageous, afraid to live the gospel in public in this way, that they also like St.

Romero, and maybe through his intercession, can find the courage to stand up for the least among us.

DAULT: Well, if I may, just to build on that, and thank you for those remarks and especially for that reference to scripture. Pope Francis often spoke about the church of the second millennium in the church of. The third millennium. So if we look backwards to the last thousand years, that church was a church of hierarchy, it was a church of authority and in many ways an authoritarian church and a church where the role of the bishop.

In the second millennium was to shut down conversation and to end debate. But as we turn towards the third millennium, and as Pope Francis invited us into the Synod way, there's a new way to think about what a bishop is for. And so instead of there to end conversation, a bishop is there to make sure that healthy conversation continues.

And in that spirit, sometimes in social media over the last decade as. People would push back against me 'cause Pope Francis would say something. On the more conservative side, using the language that we've sort of developed in this conversation, I would simply respond. The Holy Father is on a journey walking with all of us, and sometimes he's ahead of us and sometimes we are ahead of him.

And in this particular case, the priests who are on the ground bringing Eucharist to the gates of the prison in Broadview here in the Chicago area and in other places, they are bringing Christ. To the imprisoned Christ, and that is where the church is at this moment. And the bishops are not quite there yet.

We can pray that they will catch up, but as they walk with us at this particular moment, those particular priests are ahead of the curve.

SCHLUMPF: And lay people who are on the ground doing a lot of this work as well. And some of the bishops are there. So, it wasn't reflected necessarily in that statement. And another thing that was said about this statement is that perhaps it helped repair. The relationship between the Bishops Conference and Rome.

So under Francis, they were often seen as, you know, not in concert with, you know, the Vatican or with, where Pope Francis was taking things. And Pope Leo made very clear in his comments to a US delegation just a week or two ago that included bishop sites that he wanted to see the Bishops Unified on this and saying something speaking out.

So they did that. And I don't know, but I don't think, I think Leo's a smart guy. He'll see what this is that they did it, you know, and they passed it almost unanimously. There were a couple abstentions and against but that maybe this isn't the level of prophetic ness that he wanted either, but I think there was also a new.

Program, the part of a website called you Are Not Alone. That also, you know, calls people everyday Catholics and clergy to do some actions in terms of accompanying people to court. You know, and I saw another, another protest yesterday on the feast of mother Cabrini in Philadelphia.

So it seems like the people on the ground are moving forward at this and I'm hoping that this mediocre statement will at least give some people some encouragement in the work they're already doing and maybe change some hearts and minds including that of the bishops who may be opposed it. So that was a long segment 'cause we had a lot to say about what the bishops, did and met, but we'll take a brief break and we'll be back to talk a little bit about the government shutdown and reopening. You're listening to the Francis Effect.

SEGMENT 2

HORAN: Welcome back to The Francis Effect. I'm Dan Horan and I'm here with David Dolt and Heidi Schlump. Every couple of weeks we get together to discuss a variety of topics from a perspective informed by our shared Catholic faith Because of our travel schedules over the next few weeks, we are recording this episode a little bit earlier than usual.

This is being taped on Friday, November 14th, which is about a week before the episode goes live. So as we are recording today, we are in the midst of the ending of the government shutdown and the reopening and restoration of certain aspects of government programs that have been affected by that shutdown.

However, we realize that between when we record this and when you hear it, a lot may have changed. Let's start with the basics. This was the longest government shutdown in American history. It lasted 43 days. Nearly one and a half million federal workers have gone without pay for six weeks. Around three quarters of a million of those employees were required to keep working without paychecks while hundreds of thousands of others were furloughed.

It is unclear how or when those workers will receive the back pay they are owed despite a 2019 law that was passed in the wake of a previous shutdown. The Bill Congress passed to reopen The government funds the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or SNAP for another 10 months through September, 2026. Again, it's not clear how quickly the full payments will resume since that very state by state. During the shutdown, some states found ways to get benefits to recipients, but in other areas, hungry families have only received partial payments or no support at all.

Other key areas that have been deeply affected by the shutdown include our National Park System and museums. Also, the Internal Revenue Service, the IRS, is severely delayed in issuing tax refunds, and with the holidays just around the corner, it is still unclear just how badly the situation has affected air travel moving forward.

Despite the optimistic statements from Federal Aviation administration officials, it will likely be several weeks before flight schedules are back to their pre shutdown levels.

We may never know the full impact of the shutdown. According to reporting by National Public Radio, this past Wednesday, white House Press Secretary, Carolyn Levitt, told reporters that October's inflation and jobs reports will quote, likely never be released, and all of that economic data released will be permanently impaired and that the shutdown may have permanently damaged the federal statistical system, unquote.

David, this is a tangled mess, however we look at it. Where do you think we should start?

DAULT: Well, I think that we should start with. The Senate deal that ended the shutdown. And I will say I have had like the entire range of emotions around this since it, it happened over the past weekend. I was spitting mad when I first heard about it because it seemed like it was a capitulation of insulated senators who had nothing to lose and.

There have been reports, some of them unconfirmed and some of them slowly being confirmed that the airlines, for example, had a great deal of financial input into these eight senators, seven Democrats, and one independent who took the move to take us out of the shutdown. I was pleased to see that the American people, and it seemed for a while, like democratic representatives were in sort of concert understanding why we were all bearing this burden and doing the shutdown.

And then it seemed like that that pressure caved overnight. Now since that has happened. And I will also credit the many friends on social media who have pushed back against my very angry hot takes in the first 24 to 36 hours about this. It seems as if the the reopening of the government is playing out in a way that is getting good benefits for, for those that have been sort of in distress. So there is the restoration of snap and we hope that will go through. There is the possibility of restoring the back pay to those that were working without pay. But what is still very much in limbo is what is gonna happen to the healthcare subsidies.

And that's the piece that had me livid was it seemed as if Chuck Schumer and the senators simply handed over everything that the Republicans wanted and didn't get anything out of it in terms of the healthcare subsidies. Now again, this is an evolving story and we're still very early in the reopening of the government.

So again, listeners. By the time that you hear this, a lot of the landscape may have changed, but we are doing our best given the limited information that we have. But that's my initial set of thoughts. I'd be very interested in what you two are thinking.

SCHLUMPF: Like you, I was initially pretty mad too because, especially 'cause one of my senators was on that list. And. I understand, I've, you know, I've read enough pieces about it to understand the possible political strategy there. You know, I get the importance of getting the government reopened with the SNAP benefits and the back pay for the people who are really hurting on this.

But there are a lot of people who are gonna be hurting if the healthcare subsidies are not dealt with as well. And I'm, you know, you're hearing reporting already from people who are like. What am I gonna have to give up in order to pay for, you know, healthcare subies that are going up by like a thousand dollars a month?

I mean, people are talking about having to choose between food and shelter, and these are people who may have chronic health conditions to begin with. The idea is there's this promise of a vote, and I guess I'm I can't believe we're. You know that anyone would accept the promise of the Republicans these days when they say all kinds of things and then, sorry.

I know we said that, but we're not gonna do it. So I hope I'm wrong. I hope that vote happens. And the idea is that I think the Democrats think that if that vote happens on the healthcare sub subsidies, that the Republicans who would vote against it would have to own. Another, you know, piece of legislation, another action that's really hurting working class people.

And most working people in America right now are not happy with the way the economy and things are going. But it seems to me that it just kicks the can down the road. And when you hear Republicans say oh, well subsidies, you know, we need to get rid of 'em 'cause they're propping up Obamacare yet.

No kidding. People have been saying, including me for a long time. We need, you know, more nationalized healthcare that will, you know, really solve the problem of the cost of healthcare for all Americans. Not just those over 65 or those in the, in extreme poverty and. You know how interesting that now all of a sudden, now they care about this, but they weren't on board with Obamacare.

That at least took us, you know, partially there. So, I don't know. I hope I'm wrong about everything, but I am once again, like just having to cross my fingers and hope that plays out well down, down the line. But I'm not necessarily hopeful about it.

HORAN: I mean, I think like you David, I also had a kind of rollercoaster of responses, you know, following the the kind of democratic wave of the off. Cycle elections earlier this month. You know, people saw that there was clear blame being placed on the shoulders of Trump and the Republicans in the House and Senate for the shutdown.

Despite, you know, all of his best efforts to try to spin this as a democratic problem. And, you know, I have been of so many minds about this because I have very close friends who are federal employees and who have been furloughed and have not been paid. And I have a really like. I think it was actually admirable that the Democrats and the Senate were holding out on these subsidies.

I think, you know, from a political strategy point of view, there were some people who were saying, is this the right move? Does this make, you know, do people care about this? Et cetera, et cetera. And I remember. I think it might've been Ezra Klein before, you know, all of this sort of wrapped up in the past, you know, week and a half, you know, so this was maybe a month ago or so, floated the idea or somebody on his program may have, maybe it was Tona Hasi coach, somebody and I'm sorry if I'm misattributing this to people, but.

Somebody had said like, you know, another way to look at this whole situation is that the Democrats in refusing to fund the government on the whim or you know, on the grounds that are being laid out by the Republicans are actually. Preventing the Republicans from facing the consequences of their own decision, right?

Their refusal to renew the subsidies will dramatically affect the livelihood and the financial wellbeing of millions and millions of people, including many millions of people in their own constituency pools. And so it's sort of like. You know, the parent who says you can't eat all your Halloween candy on Halloween night.

You kind of have to kind of parcel this out over time. You know, even though the kid wants to eat it all, you know, the parent here is the super ego who is keeping the best interest of the child in check. And in some ways, the democrats, the adults in the room more often than not, are, have been protecting the Republicans against their own desires.

It's a cynical way. It may be a cynical way to look at this, but I mean, now that the, you know, the mo the law has passed through the Senate and the House and has been signed by Trump. I mean, I think another way to look at this is there's a lot of suffering. There's a lot of pain that's coming to people around issues of health, healthcare, right?

And these healthcare premiums and the people who are responsible for this are the Republicans. And I think the democrats in good faith can say, look, we tried for 43 days, we tried to hold our colleagues across the aisle. To, you know, to renew this for their own constituents, for the people in their own districts.

And they refused. And you know, now they've promised a vote, it's gotta happen. And if they don't, it's on them. And I think, I mean, I don't want, the thing that makes this kind of gross to me at times is the way we talk about this from a strategy. Perspective or standpoint turns real human beings and families into ponds, right?

They and I think of David, your point in an earlier segment about the material impacts, right? This is not just theoretical, this is not just the spreadsheet. This is people's lives and health. And so yeah, I am, I'm really feeling really pessimistic about this because I feel like it's a lose situation.

Even political wins result in. Kind of material losses for people and that is not right. I mean, I feel like a broken record. We reiterate on this podcast over and over again what the purpose from the Catholic perspective of a government is, and it is to protect and promote the common good. And this is a clear violation of that.

It has been for 43 days. And the risk of people losing healthcare or losing medicine or losing you know, the means by which to. Acquire those basic things necessary for human flourishing is definitely a loss and really something to regret.

DAULT: one of the things that we have to keep coming back to is, are we waiting for our representatives, whether we're talking about our Episcopal representatives in the persons of the Bishops and the Bishops Conference, or our elected representatives as a body to save us?

I think the moment that we're in is more and more we're seeing that in fact, we need to be putting pressure on the ground and we need to be finding ways to organize. And so one of the things that came out of let's just look at here in Chicago, so we had the double whammy of the ice troops on the ground and we had the diminution of SNAP benefits.

And so in both of those cases, what you saw was neighborhoods and neighbors. Coming together and organizing mutual aid and mutual support and mutual safety for each other. So now you know everybody around me as I walk around on the streets here in Hyde Park in South Chicago, a whole bunch of people are wearing whistles.

Why? Because they are part of the network of neighborhood protection that when they see ice. they, they know how they can begin warning people and everybody that has stepped up to contribute to food banks and to make sure that things are being being sort of supplied here.

And the ways in which people are caring for each other we're still not where we need to be. On that. And there have been some recent news reports about the failure, especially of religious communities to really step up in this moment. But those that have, that's the direction that we need to go.

We, we need to be putting pressure on our elected officials, but it is clear that they do not have the vision, I don't think, to actually. Face any of these moments, whether it's climate crisis, whether it is the political moment that we're in, where authoritarianism is sliding slowly into tyranny and possibly even into fascism.

And in the moment when we have to feed people and we have to make sure that people have access to healthcare, and none of those things are being addressed properly at the national level. So we need to be starting to do it at the local level. We need to be learning how to talk to each other and listen to each other and build those networks of mutual support.

SCHLUMPF: So I've been encouraged by that too. I mean, everywhere I drive people have food out in I noticed a Catholic church that had a a. Cooler out front with food in it. I put some food in my little my little book pantry and, you know, we upped our donations to our local food pantry. But I would say that, you know, charity is not enough, and Catholic social teaching is clear.

The universal destination of goods and even the principle of subsidiarity, you know, at the lowest level possible, but the highest level necessary, and the federal government is necessary to ensure. The basic needs of people are met, like food and previous conversation, healthcare. And so I really I really think that despite people stepping up and that being encouraging, we still need to put pressure on our elected officials and on our religious leaders who lobby our elected officials and just shout out to network the Catholic lobbying network that's been doing a lot of net you know.

Lobbying on this topic for a long time to try to get them to move on. The importance of helping people who don't get the basic necessities, whether that's food or basic healthcare.

HORAN: Think what you said, Heidi is really good. You know, charity is important, and this is something again to harken back to Pope Leo, the fourteenth's apostolic exhortation on the poor, on poverty from October, where on the one hand he says, you know, charity, which by the way in Latin caritas is means love, right?

That this is not an optional thing. It's something for all Christians, everyone's care called to care for one another. To show love to one another in the spirit of what Jesus taught at the same time. There are principles in Catholic social teaching about how we structure society and our economies such that it's not that that there isn't as much of a precarious emphasis on individual goodwill.

That there should be a collective sort of safety net to use a modern phrase. And that is the role of the government, again, in the promotion and protection of the common good. And so the answer is not. To food bank ourselves out of this. The answer is not to, you know, have private donations. That kind of reliance is too precarious and undermines what the real purpose of government is meant to be, at least in the Catholic tradition.

So I really appreciate you saying that, right? And in the short term, we should all do what we can to help one another. And I think those things are admirable and I wanna encourage that. But you know, I'm thinking of, dom Helder for the bishop from Brazil, who famously said that, you know, when I feed the hungry, people call me a saint, but when I ask why are people starving, they call me a communist and I think.

You know, we need to risk being called communists. I know David, who's a fan of Marxist philosophy doesn't see that necessarily as an insult, but in some circles people throw that around derogatorily. Nevertheless, I mean, we should be seen as those who are embracing our Christian vocation quite seriously.

And you know, and I think that's a through line in many of the. The elements of the conversation that we've been having on this episode, right? Whether we're talking about the role of our church leaders in, in the US Catholic Church, whether we're talking about our civil and political leaders we all have a responsibility to care for one another.

And again, I wanna encourage whether you're a representative in congress, a senator, a member of the Trump administration, or of another party, whether you were a US. Bishop or in a staff member in a chancery somewhere. I think we could all do well to go back and read Leo the Fourteenth's exhortation from last month.

That touches on precisely this theme.

DAULT: On that note, I just wanna say I am yes schooled in the Marxist tradition, but I. Really get my communism more from Acts chapter five and so on. On that note, listeners, we are going to take this conversation and bring it to a close, but I am unfortunately sure that we will be taking it up again as we see how the reopening of the government continues to unfold and how things work and fail to work on the local and national levels.

So please be in prayer about this for your neighbors. Please talk to your neighbors and please know that we are in prayer for you and your neighbors as well as we move forward through this uncertain time. We are gonna move now to our third segment where Heidi is interviewing Kat Amis about the spirituality of resisting Empire during Advent.

So that's coming up here on the Francis Effect. Please stay with us.

SEGMENT 3

SCHLUMPF: Welcome back to The Francis Effect. I'm Heidi Schlump with today's guest, Kat Armas, a Cuban American writer, speaker, and theologian who may be best known for her essay in the National Catholic Reporter that was shared by then Cardinal Robert Prevost. Shortly before he was elected Pope, that essay argued that JD Vance is wrong.

Jesus doesn't ask us to rank our love for others. Amis writes from a lens critical of empire and colonization. Her books include Abuelita, faith, what Women on the Margins Teach us about Wisdom. Persistence and strength and sacred belonging. A 40 day devotional on the liberating heart of scripture, her latest book just out this month, is Liturgies for Resisting Empire Seeking Community Belonging and Peace in a Dehumanizing World.

Her work has also appeared in Plow Magazine. Christian Century Christianity Today and Sojourner Magazine, and she previously co-hosted a podcast called The Proteus, which highlighted stories and experiences of black, indigenous, and other women of color among communities of faith. Amis holds graduate degrees in theology and ministry from Vanderbilt Divinity School.

Fuller Theological Seminary originally from Miami. She now lives in Tennessee, but is speaking with us today from California where she's on tour for her new book. So thank you so much for joining us, Kat. In between all your book promo

ARMAS: Thank you so much for having me and that was such a wonderful description. I was telling my husband earlier, I'm like, I feel like, 'cause when I read the description I'm like, that is probably the best and most accurate bio that someone has read me. So thank you.

SCHLUMPF: Well, I do write and summarize things for a living, so maybe I'm pretty good at it. Now, I've been a long time fan of your regular writing in NCR, and especially a recent piece you did about rising political violence and authoritarianism and the threat of civil war. And in that piece you conclude that despair.

Is not the only path. So could you say a little bit more about how your faith and spirituality sustains you during these times? Or what spiritual guidance can you give us at this time when we need to resist empire?

ARMAS: Yeah. You know, I think that's a great question. Because it is so easy to sort of give into despair during these times. You know, there's, as you mentioned, so much going on and, you know, the idea of empire can seem so vast and so big and just intertwined sort of, you know, my work. I talk about how Empire is so intertwined into everything that we think and how we just move through the world, right?

Our relationship to time, to money, to our bodies. I mean, everything all of these systems are infiltrated through the lens or through the ideologies, as I say, of Empire. So yes, it can feel really easy to feel despair. Also, you know, because Empire is so interwoven in everything that we think and are just as it was in the early church, just as it was in the story of the people of, you know, most of God's people in scripture, most of the stories there are so many ways that we can resist, right?

There are so many things that we can do. As I like to call it to just put one drop of water into the fire at a time, right? Like one little drop at a time. You know, there are a myriad of ways that we can lean into our passions, our longings, our callings in order for us to start to divest from all of these systems that are in us and around us.

You know, whether that's your passion is. Art or creation, right? You can create art and do art in such a way that is true to yourself and in such a way that is resisting, you know, whatever you know, whatever you seek to resist in the time, in the, you know, these times, which there are so many things.

Yeah, if your passion is, you know. Being out in nature. I think that's a huge way that we can begin to divest from these, you know, sort of systems by quite literally touching the earth, right? Because Empire is all about disconnecting us from the land. I mean, that's been the history of Empire, right?

Is to remove, quite literally remove people from the land. And so I think it's a beautiful act of resistance to, you know, get to know the earth. And so I think, I think it's easy to fall into despair, but also it's just we have just as much opportunity to. Fight against that despair. And I also see it, you know, my, my previous work my first book is called Aita Faith, as you mentioned.

And it's the story of women throughout history who have, you know, under the heavy hand of empire who have resisted in a myriad of ways, whether that's the women in Argentina, you know, mothers in Argentina of the disappeared, but quite literally, you know, made. Quilts from their hands as a form of political resistance, or women who have, I mean, there's a myriad of things that women in particular have done subversive ways to you know, not lose hope and to stand against these systems that are trying to sre us constantly.

And so, yeah I'll say just what are your longings and your callings and your passions, and how can you lean into that as a form of resistance.

SCHLUMPF: Well, since you brought up the quilting, I gotta, I wanna ask you about the quilt athon that you recently attended in Tennessee, I believe, right? In support of migrants, especially at this time of mass deportations by the Trump administration. Can you tell us a little bit more about that? I saw a bunch of folks who had attended that.

Sharing some of it on social media and how do you see the, it was mostly women, right? How are the women kind of leading resistance through this quil on there?

ARMAS: Yeah. You know, it's, as I mentioned, like, you know, you know, the, they called them the s they were they were actually in Chile, and they. In the time of binoche in the regime people were being disappeared. Not different than what is happening now, right? People were being disappeared by the government.

I mean, we're literally put into cars and taken and. You know, they were just literally being disappeared. And the mothers of these of the disappeared, as they call them, the mothers and grandmothers, in order to resist because they could not use their voices for fear of also you know, being jailed and executed they would stitch whether it was the hair, the clothes, you know, of the disappeared and such political messaging.

And that was their sort of form of resisting you know. What was happening and the, so the quilts I bring that up because the quilt of thought that I attended really reminded me of that. You know, it can seem like such I don't know a sort of a passive way of talking about or sort of a passive way of resisting.

But, there really is so much power in using your hands and using your body. You know, I talk so much about an embodied theology, right? An embodied hope, and there really is something active about that. I mean, of using your fingers and your, you know, to, to stitch something with your hands and with your body as a form of.

You know, telling the truth. And I think that was such a beautiful reminder in this cohon. I mean, it went all night. I wasn't there all night because I have two little kids. But I thought that was also a beautiful thing. Like, we are not going to, you know, we're gonna be here for as long as we need to be here.

Right. We're not gonna, it's not this structured time. We're just gonna sit here and we're gonna quilt and we're gonna, you know. Talk about what's happening and we're gonna sing worship songs and we're going to be in this space together. And so, yeah, I, it was a really beautiful time and it was a reminder that this is how, again, women in particular have resisted throughout history and we can carry that legacy forward.

You know, as we're watching very similar things happening now that did that have been done throughout history.

SCHLUMPF: So I might be mixing this up with another women getting together to do stitching. But was part of this group also about bringing women from different perspectives together and did it have that effect of bringing together people from maybe different political or other, you know, groups and building some unity or at least community there?

ARMAS: Maybe so the organization that threw this it, that they're called, we choose welcome and I recommend anyone listening if they wanna check them out and follow them. And they're all about this idea of, you know, their thing is immigration reform and immigration justice. And so, yeah, I mean, I think even in that, right, you're bringing.

A lot of people together from a lot of different spaces and places for a common cause, right? And that's the dignity of all persons regardless of their immigration status. You know, I think right now in our political climate, there's this idea that your. You know, your immigration, like I said, immigration status or your citizenship status is like a marker of dignity and worth.

And I think that there's something powerful when we come together and we say, no, your worth is in who you are. The imago day in you, that is your worth. Not whether you have papers that say you, you know, you belong to this country. I mean, and so I think that there is something powerful to, for people from all walks of life to come together and declare that.

SCHLUMPF: So I'm a long time crafter here and believer in the subversive power of creating. But just a quick follow up question. You've mentioned being creative or touching the earth. I think most people think, oh, well the really the way to respond in a time like this is to do things that are political or joining a protest.

Or here in Chicago where I live, people are grabbing whistles and videotaping and trying to warn people who are in danger of being disappeared, as you note. So, say a little bit about why you think a little more expansively about this.

ARMAS: Yeah. You know, and I 100% think that yes, we need to be doing all the things. I think that's wonderful to have the whistle and to I think that there, again, there's so many different ways that we can resist, but I also think, and this is what my newest book touches on, is the idea that.

Again, as I mentioned earlier, empire is so infiltrated in everything that in order for us to be able to continue to see effect change out there, you know the quote unquote out there, it's also really important for us to, you know, work on sort of the empire within, to rid ourselves of the empire within, to sort of rid ourselves of these ideologies, of these systems in ourselves first, or.

At the same time as we're doing, you know, sort of the political change, you know, because. Our relationships, our family dynamics, our friendships. I mean, these are all systems, right? And if we're, you know, rid ourselves of empire in these systems that hit home, it's sort of a reverberation out into the greater systems out there, right?

Because if we don't I argue if we don't rid ourselves from the empire within, then all that's gonna do is. We're going to continue to replicate these systems in our families, in our churches, in our communities, right? I mean, if we're not rid ourselves of hierarchy, of violent theology and violent ideologies, if we're not rid ourselves of the notions of hierarchy and homogeneity or sameness, all of these things that empire thrives on is sustained by if we're still functioning with these sort of ideologies and mindsets in our own.

Personal lives, then we're not gonna see change out there. Right. So I think it's all of it. I think it's marching, it's protesting, voting. Absolutely. I do all of those things and also I'm constantly taking stock of my own life and wondering where are these systems embedded in me and how can I do the personal work of rid myself of these systems so that I don't replicate them or als.

And also so that when I am in a space, a church space. Or church space or any sort of community, I can recognize it, right? I can sniff it out, recognize, oh, these are sort of the, just a replication of empire, so how am I either resisting in that space or walking away from that space? Right? This activist Adrian Marie Brown, she uses the notion of fractals to talk about this, and I love that.

So the idea of fractals in the natural world, and I always love bringing everything back to the natural world because the natural world is our greatest teacher, right? But fractals is the idea that. All of the patterns, right? Like the patterns in our fingertips, the swirls in our fingertips, they are sort of self-replicating in the cosmos.

So all the miniature sort of, patterns that you see in seashells and in again fingertips, and they are the same patterns that you see in the galaxies, in the stars. And it's this idea that not only is everything interconnected. But also what we see in the small and the minuscule right in your fingertips.

We also see in the grand scale of the earth. And so I think it's the same thing when it comes to seeing change in our world. It's are you building yourself of the empire in your sis, in your. Family systems, are you working toward healing toward liberation in your own life so that we can see that change worked out in, you know, sort of out there as I like to say, in the grand systems?

Because empire is big and there and it's vast and there are a lot of ways that it can and tear us down. And so yeah, I'm always looking to see like, how can I, you know, how is my parenting you know. Different than the systems out there. How is, you know, how I engage with people, with myself and Yeah.

So I'll pause there.

SCHLUMPF: I love that you're talking about both the macro and the micro, like the internal and the external.

ARMAS: exactly.

SCHLUMPF: So I wanted to ask you, we're not only facing a lot of these issues politically in this time, but we're about to move into a spiritual time in our Catholic season of advent. So. A time that's traditionally about anticipation about preparation.

What do you think about how the political and practical world we're living in right now, one, like we've talked about in which masked agents are literally disappearing people off the streets. How should this affect Catholics who are marking this season? Do you have any thoughts about that?

ARMAS: Yeah. You know, I. I like, I'm sure most people I love the season of Advent, particularly because of that, because it is a season of anticipation, of waiting and. Currently in our world, outside of what's happening politically, I think that we are people who, you know, really struggles with anticipation and with waiting in our culture and in our society.

You know, we are so accustomed to the now and the, you know, the newer is better and now, and and so in that aspect of it, I think that this is such a wonderful season spiritually for us to sort of recalibrate. And then on the other. End of things, as you mentioned, what is happening in our world, you know, advent to me is a season is such a subversive time in just the story of Jesus.

I mean, the fact that you have this woman, I mean the, you know, the Magnifica, you have this young, marginalized woman, right, proclaiming this new. You know, age that we're going to step into. Right. You know, obviously proclaiming her son Jesus. Right. I think it is such a I write about this and I think literally all three of my books, just how powerful it is for a young woman of that time to proclaim the things that she proclaimed.

I mean, not just in that time, but for us now. Right. It is just a true. Vision. You know, I talk a lot about how empire sort of clouds our imagination and the way that, you know, it's hard for us to imagine something new when all we've ever known are these systems. But I love that Mary, the mother of Jesus, just imagines something so far beyond the reality that she was living in, you know, under the, again, the empire. I mean, this is, there's so many connections that we see now. And so, yeah, I think this, if we kinda look at the Magnificat, look at the sort of, the moment in history I really think that it can, inspire us, you know, in this, as we've been talking about this subversive sort of living of reimagining the world that we want to see as Mary did. Right. I also, you know, I've written about Advent. Advent in the past because I gave birth to my daughter right before Advent, and I remember struggling so much at that time, you know, as a new mother and you know, just.

All of the things that we're told we are to feel during advent hope and joy and peace and love. And it was a time, you know, it was 2021, so we were still kind of in the pandemic and I just didn't, you know, quote unquote feel those things. I wasn't feeling the hope and the joy and the peace and the love particularly as I said, as a new mother in a system that doesn't support new mothers.

And there was just so many things. And it was, you know. Right after the pandemic, it was right after 2020 and everything happening, you know, George Floyd and all of that. And I was really struggling to sort of feel, you know, the feelings of Advent. And it was in that, that I'm realizing, you know, it's because Empire.

You know, and I use Empire in a very broad sense, but Empire has convinced us that peace, you know, is to come through the sword and that peace is to come through violence and that, you know, love is conditional. And so, you know, we're seeing all of these things that we're supposed to reflect on, but through the lens of Empire.

It's not very loving or peaceful or joyful, right? But we're told this is how you are to think and feel and be. And so it was really during that time of stripping away of the, what are the illusions of empire? How is, how are we told that we're supposed to experience these things? And what is, you know, what's the reality here?

What are we really experiencing in our world? And it's not that. And so I think that was another sort of stripping away the illusions of empire and seeing and saying, well. What are we being told? You know? And you really see this reflected in just the birth of Jesus. And this is what I also think is just so incredible.

You know, we get this like beautiful little picture of a manger, right? And we get this beautiful little picture of Mary s swaddling, a clean baby with all these sweet little animals, you know, kind of hanging out, hanging around. And really again, I had just given birth and I knew it was nothing like that.

Right. I can only imagine what the actual moment was like. I mean, the blood, the fear, you know, the primal groans. I mean, this is a truly in. Bodied experience. I mean, I live on a farm, I know what that smells like. I know what you know. And so if you are looking at sort of speaking of the idea of illusion, right?

This illusion that we've created around the birth of Jesus and what it actually was probably like, you know, it's very different. And so I think that's another thing to reflect on in the season of Advent that empire might, you know, create this sort of illusion of what the birth of Jesus was like and what this.

You know, season of advent is like, but really the reality is that it's messy and multi-layered and bloody. And it's human right. It is extremely human. And I think that is the most beautiful thing for me about the birth of Jesus. That it was so utterly human and it gives us permission to just be utterly human in the midst of it.

So, yeah, that's, you know, kind of what I reflect on when it comes to advent.

SCHLUMPF: Well, thank you, and I'm so glad you highlighted the Magnifico, the group that is organizing the masses, trying to get communion to folks here outside of Chicago who are in the detention slash. Processing center. They have organized where people are wearing t-shirts with a quote from the magnifico

ARMAS: Oh good. Yes.

Amazing.

SCHLUMPF: bringing down the, raising up the lowly and bringing down the powerful.

And then there comes from, you know, these are words from Mary, obviously from a woman.

And Kind of gets back to what you were talking about the importance of women during these times. I was, sorry to hear that your own grandmother is in hospice and nearing the end of her earthly journey. So, we'll be praying for you and for her in these times.

But given that you've written about Abuelita and maybe you could tell us a little bit about what you've learned from her and what other women, you know, especially from marginalized communities, can teach us today. Okay.

ARMAS: Yeah, well, so much. You know, so much that I wrote a whole book about it. But I think one of the main things, so there's two, you know, the. The crux of my work is the question, what if the greatest theologians the world has ever known are those who the world wouldn't consider theologians at all?

And I see that in Maya Abuela's life and really in just the lives of so many marginalized women in particular, but people in general, right? It's that we consider theolog. You know, we look to those who, again, empire, who the dominant culture says is wise, right? Those with degrees and pulpits and, you know, vestments.

And that's who we look to for our theological insight. And I'm saying, well, you know, I've actually received more wisdom and theological insight from those, you know, as you know, as you just mentioned, right. In. In the detention centers in, you know, my grandmother a refugee, and I learned so much from her life about simply survival.

And you see this in the Bible. So much of how, you know, survival is in and of itself a sacred endeavor, right? Like, it's not spiritualized. So many women in particular as I focus on in my original work, but women in particular are quite literally. Just trying to make it to the next day and somehow they're called blessed.

I mean, you think of the story of Ruth, right? And her story is about her trying to secure her own future for her and her mother-in-law. And she ends up in the genealogy of Jesus. I mean, her story, she is one of the sort of mothers of the faith right in the Bible and. Her story is one of survival. I mean, you think of the story of Esther, you know, and how she tried to her story is the story not only of survival for her own self, but for her people.

And again, she is one of the mother, you know. And so I learned that through my grandmother's life, through her embodied, right? Because all of these stories are. Bodied. They're not theological or theoretical, but they're, they all involve quite literally women using their hands. The story of Tabitha in Acts chapter nine, I mean, she dies and Peter is called upon to Resurrector.

And what is it that, you know, the widows come and bring him? It's all the tunics that she made for them. And you know, I always think like, wow, we know nothing of Tabitha's life other than she quite literally sewed. And that was reason enough. For her to be resurrected. Right. I think that's fascinating and it tells you so much about, you know, the a.

The power of an embodied faith, and B yeah, how women were shaping and changing communities in the ancient world and even now through the work of their hands. And so I saw that in my own grandmother's life. She sewed for our community. That's how she provided for us as a widow. You know, she provided food.

I mean, she cooked for. Everyone every night, you know, and her table was, you know, it was her table. She wasn't a guest at someone else's table. She was, you know, the host, the one, you know, feeding and providing. And and yeah and I've learned that her story of survival, of resistance, of persistence is the story of so many women of faith throughout history.

And that survival is in and of itself a holy endeavor.

SCHLUMPF: Well, thank you so much, Kat. That's definitely something I'm gonna take from this interview that survival is a sacred sacred work and work we need to do now and throughout Advent. So we're so grateful to you for joining us on The Francis Effect. And we'll provide links to your work and your books in our show notes.

So thanks again for coming. You're listening to The Francis Effect.