Sts. Peter and Paul
June 28, 2025 Column Father De Celles
PRUDENTIAL JUDGMENT. The Lord Jesus Christ has blessed His Catholic Church with the fullness of His Divine Revelation, coming to us in both Sacred Scriptures and Sacred Tradition, and handed down to us especially through the ministry of his apostles and their successors, the popes and bishops, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Moreover, under that same guidance over the last 2000 years the Church has gained an ever-deepening understanding of that Revelation, so that today we possess a vast treasury of Catholic doctrine(s) teaching us how to follow Christ.
Even so, applying that treasury of doctrine to the choices of everyday life is not so easy. For example, there is no specific doctrine that tells you what particular clothes you should wear today, or the name of the person you should marry.
But Catholic doctrine does give us basic criteria for making those choices. And the same Holy Spirit who guides the whole Church also guides the life of every Christian. And on top of that, every human being has the gift of reason, the ability to rationally figure things out.
So when we face the choices of life—big and small—as Catholics we take all that treasury of doctrine(s) and compare those to the facts at hand, and then use reason and the grace of the Holy Spirit to make the very best judgment, or choice, we can. This process is called “following our conscience,” and this choice we make is called a “prudential judgment.”
But the problem is, there are a lot of variables here: Do we know what the Church teaches on a particular issue? Do we know all the facts, and see them clearly? Are we reasoning well? Sometimes we’re less logical or more emotional than we should be. And then sometimes we fail to allow the Holy Spirit to guide us.
Because of that, different people—even truly good Catholics—can often reach different conclusions about the same particular choices. Let’s consider 2 different situations that came up last week that involve prudential judgments where good Catholics are free to disagree with each other.
Bombing Iran. The first situation is President Trump’s decision to bomb the nuclear development sites in Iran last Sunday.
Most in the West seem to approve of the bombing, even many of Trump’s harshest critics from both political parties. But many also disapprove, for various reasons: some are concerned about getting into another “never ending war;” some are (quasi) isolationists; some think there were still diplomatic possibilities; some deny Iran was developing a bomb, some are radical Islamists, and some have other reasons.
But some, particularly some Catholics, argue that this attack does not meet the requirements of a “just war.” Over the centuries the Church has developed some practical criteria for judging whether particular wars are just, i.e., moral or immoral. Perhaps I will present a lengthier discussion of these requirements in column someday, but the main criteria that critics are citing in this case in Iran is the requirement that all peaceful alternatives must be exhausted before going to war: i.e., the “last resort” criteria. The thing about this is that this criterion, as with most of the just war criteria, is subject to the prudential judgment of the “legitimate authority,” in this case, President Trump. (That’s another of the criteria: only the “legitimate authority” can make the decision).
In my humble prudential judgment, taking into account the facts I know, the teaching of the Church and right reason, this bombing does meet the criteria of a just war, at least to the extent that I can defer to the President, since he is the only one who, besides knowing more facts than I do, is responsible for making the decision. Of course, we can disagree, but unless the facts are objectively clearly in our favor, we cannot condemn the decision of the “legitimate authority.”
Illegal Immigration Enforcement. Last week two stories were in the news in which Catholic clergy expressed opposition to President Trump’s efforts to enforce the laws against illegal immigration, specifically his “mass deportation” of illegal aliens.
The first was the case in San Diego where two bishops and a dozen priests showed up at a deportation court hearing to support the illegal immigrants. Our Sunday Visitor reported that the priest leading the group said, “So the good news is while we were there, no one got detained or deported.”
The other case was a letter issued by Archbishop Timothy Broglio, the President of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), in which he stated, in part:
“Law enforcement actions aimed at preserving order and ensuring community security are necessary for the common good. However, the current efforts go well beyond those with criminal histories. In the context of a gravely deficient immigration system, the mass arrest and removal of our neighbors, friends and family members on the basis of immigration status alone, particularly in ways that are arbitrary or without due process, represent a profound social crisis before which no person of good will can remain silent….
“The chronic lack of opportunities for legal status for our immigrant brothers and sisters, together with the growing denial of due process to them, is injurious to human dignity and is a considerable factor in the breakdown of the rule of law. Likewise, unfounded accusations against Catholic service providers, who every day endeavor to provide critical support and care to the most vulnerable, contribute to societal tensions and a growing climate of fear.
“On behalf of my brother bishops, I want to assure all of those affected by actions which tear at the fabric of our communities of the solidarity of your pastors. As your shepherds, your fear echoes in our hearts and we make your pain our own. Count on the commitment of all of us to stand with you in this challenging hour.”
Now, in both of these cases Bishops and priests seem to be siding with illegal immigrants, and against law enforcement. But we can readily see the prudential judgment is involved here; for example, the Archbishop seems not to give much importance to the negative effect of illegal immigration on the rest of the “community,” specifically legal immigrants and citizens. So that these Bishops and priests, even the President of the USCCB, are merely expressing their prudential judgment.
They may be right, but you can make a different prudential judgment. You might judge that the current law enforcement efforts seem just and necessary, or at least that you are willing to defer to the “legitimate authority,” i.e., the President and federal officials.
The point is we have freedom here to disagree. But, we must always take all that treasury of doctrine(s) and compare those to the facts at hand, and then use reason and the grace of the Holy Spirit to make the very best judgment, or choice, we can.
CORPUS CHRISTI PROCESSION. Thanks to all who attended and helped make last week’s Procession and “social” a blessed event. Most especially, thanks to the choir, the servers, and all those who arranged for the ice-cream.
Oremus pro invicem. Fr. De Celles