Private Prayer, Public Campaign Material

The White House was asked whether it had permission to publish bishops praying with Donald Trump. Its answer was that nobody had ever been a greater president for Catholics. Apparently consent is now measured in presidential greatness, a unit available only from the manufacturer.

Milwaukee Archbishop Jeffrey Grob’s October 25 apology describes a different understanding of the October 22 visit. He and 11 other bishops had been invited to discuss issues including immigration enforcement and religious worker visas. They were told the discussion would be private, with a possible opportunity to pray privately with the president. This was not, he stressed, an endorsement of Trump, his policies or his party.

Grob says the bishops spent 90 minutes with domestic policy staff and advisers before entering the Oval Office. Trump gave them commemorative tokens; they were directed to stand behind him and pray. Photos followed. According to Grob, the bishops did not know a video was being recorded and did not authorize public distribution of either the photographs or the video. Knowing a camera is present is not the same as approving its distribution list.

The distinction matters. This is the archbishop’s account, not a retrieved confidentiality agreement or a legal finding. Nobody needs to invent an election-law violation to notice the discrepancy between a promised private encounter and a public promotion. National Catholic Reporter reported that the prayer video was shared by both White House communications adviser Margo Martin and the president’s campaign account.

The administration has a substantive defense, too. White House Faith Director Jenny Korn called it policy work, not politics, citing discussion of religious freedom, school choice, family tax credits, religious visas and life. The bishops had a seat at the table, she said. Grob’s own account confirms a substantial policy discussion. It would be unfair to pretend they were summoned for nothing but a photograph. It would be equally convenient to pretend that holding a meeting settles who agreed to advertise it.

Asked specifically about consent, the White House declined to answer, the Associated Press reported. Spokeswoman Taylor Rogers supplied the greatest-president claim instead. Her broader defense to NCR cited religious rights, pardons for anti-abortion activists and parental rights. Even accepting that account of Trump’s record would not establish permission to publish somebody else’s prayer.

The bishops cannot claim the calendar surprised them. Des Moines Bishop William Joensen acknowledged that they knew an election was close and regretted being insufficiently shrewd. Grob apologized to people who felt wounded by his participation. They are now explaining to their communities what their presence did not mean, while the administration enjoys the picture.

There is a modest way to respect religious leaders without converting their access into an implied testimonial: ask before posting. The White House offered its review of the president instead. Five stars. Permission not included.