logo
Pope Francis, first Latin American pontiff, holds a special place for Hispanic Catholics

Pope Francis, first Latin American pontiff, holds a special place for Hispanic Catholics

Yahoo21-04-2025

Elisabeth Román said she'll never forget where she was on March 13, 2013, the day that Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio of Buenos Aires, Argentina, was elected pope.
'I was in a restaurant in Puerto Rico, and it came on the TV that we might have a Latino pope,' said Román, who lives in Chicago and is the president of the National Catholic Council for Hispanic Ministry, which promotes the advancement and engagement of Latino Catholics. "It was so exciting, it felt electric — things felt so hopeful, that we would finally have a pope who comes from our culture.'
Assessing his legacy, Román said that 'not only has this pope connected with Latinos, it often felt as if he did so directly; he has not seemed as impeded by bureaucracy as other popes — he speaks directly to us, he sees us, he had an impact on our people that is powerful.'
The 266th Roman Catholic pontiff, known to the world as Pope Francis, died on Monday at the age of 88. The first pope from the Americas, he forged bonds of faith and connection with millions of Latino Catholics across the United States and Latin America.
Román was one of several U.S. Catholics who recently spoke to NBC News after Pope Francis was hospitalized for serious health issues in late February.
One in 5 U.S. adults describe themselves as Catholic and of these, over a third (36%) are Latino, according to a 2024 Pew Research Center report.
Just as many Polish Americans felt a special affinity with John Paul II, so it was with Latinos and Pope Francis, said Hosffman Ospino, professor of Hispanic Ministry and Religious Education at Boston College.
'He has been able to name many of the realities, concerns, and hopes of Hispanic Catholics in the U.S.,' said Ospino, a native of Colombia. 'He addressed issues related to immigration, to social justice, assimilation and evangelization — he was very intentionally attentive to how Hispanics are integrated into the life of the church.'
Olga Sarabia, a retired clinical social worker in Pasadena, California, said her parish had joined others around the globe since late February in special prayers for Francis.
'We were all concerned about our papa," she said, using the Spanish word for pope.
'I loved him because he displayed an openness to all people ... He elevated women, like he appointed a nun to a high office in the Vatican, which is unheard of," Sarabia said. "I remember, when he first came in, he went and washed the feet of the prisoners in jail. This showed his character. He was a pope of the people.'
From his love of soccer — though he called himself a 'patadura,' or bad soccer player — to his native Spanish language, the Argentine pope endeared himself to many who identified with his cultural heritage, warmth and compassion.
Acknowledging the traditions of Latino Catholics; he urged Mexicans last year to continue their devotion to Our Lady of Guadalupe, the Catholic saint and icon that's a powerful symbol of Mexican identity.
In 2022, he celebrated a mass in Spanish at the Vatican, where he said that Our Lady of Guadalupe 'came to accompany the American people on this hard road of poverty, exploitation, socio-economic and cultural colonialism' and that 'she is our mother of mixed race.'
Pope Francis had two consistent messages, both of which resonated with many of his Hispanic followers, Ospino said. 'One was his concern for those living in poverty; the poor have been at the center of his pontificate. He invited Catholics to be part of a church that was in service of the poor.'
'His second message, right from Day 1, was the plight of immigrants,' Ospino continued. 'Francis was keen to the realities and struggles of immigrants in Europe, the Caribbean, the U.S. and Latin America. He will be remembered as the pope who brought and centered our attention on those who were poor, and on the migrant populations of the world.'
In 2019, on a trip to Central America, Pope Francis suggested that animosity toward migrants was driven by fear and 'makes us crazy.' In 2022, he sympathized with migrant caravans trekking to the U.S.'s southern border seeking what he called 'freedom and well-being.' In January 2025, he named a vocal ally of migrants to lead the Archdiocese of Washington.
More than four-in-ten U.S. Catholics are immigrants or children of immigrants, according to Pew Research data.
On migration, Pope Francis did not shy away from political controversies. He was a fierce critic of President Donald Trump's immigration policies, saying on a 2016 visit to Mexico that "a person who only thinks about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian. In January he called Trump's plans for mass deportations 'a disgrace.'
In a February letter to U.S. bishops, the pope criticized the criminalization of migrants and deportations, warning, 'What is built on the basis of force, and not on the truth about the equal dignity of every human being, begins badly and will end badly.'
In the U.S., Pope Francis was able to connect because of his awareness of Latino communities, said Ellie Hidalgo, co-director of Discerning Deacons in Miami, a Catholic group that advocates for female deacons. 'Francis understood Latin American cultures, religious traditions and popular devotions. He understands the faith of the people and their resilience, as well as the violence, the poverty and suffering that can drive one's decision to leave their country.'
Pope Francis has generally been viewed positively by U.S. Latino Catholics. Almost 8 in 10 viewed him mostly or very favorably, Pew found in its 2024 study, with a plurality describing him as representing major change in the direction of the Catholic Church.
This popularity stands in contrast to the clear majorities of U.S. Latinos and Latin Americans who favor positions opposed by the Catholic Church, such as allowing Catholics to use birth control, allowing priests to marry and allowing women to become priests.
Yunuen Trujillo, a lay minister and author in Los Angeles, said that Pope Francis made the Catholic Church more inclusive for LGBTQ+ people.
In 2013, when asked about gay priests, Pope Francis famously said, 'If someone is gay and he searches for the Lord and has good will, who am I to judge?"
"We shouldn't marginalize people for this,' the pontiff said.
"Just by acknowledging our existence," Trujillo said, "and speaking about us in a positive light many times, that is a big change in perspective."
In his 12 years as pope, Francis made multiple visits to the Americas, including trips to Brazil (2013), Ecuador, Bolivia and Paraguay (2015), Cuba and the U.S. (2015), Cuba and Mexico (2016), Colombia (2017), Chile and Peru (2018) and Panama (2019).
He addressed issues pertaining to these countries, such as urging Colombia's government and guerrillas to agree to a peace deal, and condemning drug cartels in Mexico and urging young people not to join them.
Francis' populist style at times alarmed some conservatives and traditionalists. In 2015, returning from a visit to Cuba, he defended his remarks on climate change, capitalism and other issues, saying, 'I am certain that I didn't say one thing more than wasn't in the doctrine of the church.'
Trujillo pointed out at the way the pope introduced himself to the world in 2013, coming to the papal balcony in black shoes rather than the traditional red Prada shoes. 'It showed that he wanted to be like regular people. Just seeing someone who speaks Spanish, in the leadership role, was important to Latinos who wanted to feel closer to the church.'
And although change and reforms may be slow, she feels that Francis moved the Catholic Church in the right direction. 'This was a good pope.'This article was originally published on NBCNews.com

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Homan: Newsom, Bass haven't crossed line but ‘not above the law'
Homan: Newsom, Bass haven't crossed line but ‘not above the law'

The Hill

time10 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Homan: Newsom, Bass haven't crossed line but ‘not above the law'

Border czar Tom Homan said on Monday that California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass (D) have not crossed the line amid tensions between law enforcement and immigration raid protesters, but they, like everyone else, are 'not above the law.' In an interview on MSNBC's 'Morning Joe,' Homan sought to clarify earlier remarks that he said were taken 'out of context' by news outlets reporting that he declined to rule out arresting Newsom and Bass amid a clash between the federal and state leaders over the best approach to quelling protests in Los Angeles. Homan said his previous remarks initially focused on the protesters. 'Here's what I said: They have a right to protest, they have the First Amendment rights, but they can't cross that line. They can't cross that line of impediment. They can't cross that line of putting their hands on officers. They can't cross the line of knowing and concealing an illegal alien,' Homan said. 'These are all federal crimes, and they're in statute, and they will be prosecuted.' Homan said a reporter then asked him whether those rules apply to Newsom and Bass. 'He asked the question, 'Does that include Mayor Bass and Governor Newsom?' and I was clear they haven't crossed the line, but they're not above the law either,' Homan said, stressing that he noted Newsom and Bass would face prosecution only 'if they commit a crime.' The remarks came in an interview early Monday, when Homan was asked to respond to Newsom's dare late Sunday to arrest him. Newsom had been responding to reports that Homan threatened to do so if he or Bass interfered in immigration enforcement efforts. 'Come after me, arrest me. Let's just get it over with, tough guy, you know? I don't give a damn. But I care about my community. I care about this community,' Newsom told NBC News on Sunday. 'So, Tom, arrest me. Let's go,' Newsom added. But Homan, on Monday, brushed off the remarks. 'I'm not biting on that,' Homan said. After he clarified his earlier remarks, Homan said, 'That's what was happening. I never threatened to arrest Governor Newsom.'

Opinion - Unfixable FEMA puts the ‘disaster' into ‘disaster recovery'
Opinion - Unfixable FEMA puts the ‘disaster' into ‘disaster recovery'

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Opinion - Unfixable FEMA puts the ‘disaster' into ‘disaster recovery'

We thought reform was possible. We were wrong. We were brought to Puerto Rico to fix FEMA's broken disaster recovery processes after Hurricane Maria struck in 2017. Our team of seven Lean Six Sigma experts — decorated military officers and retired executives — had more than 150 years of combined experience in process improvement across 60 organizations in more than 20 countries, including war zones. FEMA was the only organization our team unanimously deemed unfixable — not because the mission was complex, but because of its toxic mix of incompetence, lack of accountability, and calcified dysfunction. FEMA's three-part mission was extremely simple: assess damage, calculate costs, release funds. Yet two years after Hurricane Maria, only 5 percent to 8 percent of cost estimates had been completed. Recovery had stalled. And instead of admitting failure, FEMA inflated $1.5 billion in project estimates to mislead Congress. At FEMA's Joint Recovery Office near San Juan — with 2,000 to 3,000 staff — the public Wi-Fi password had to be changed because so many employees were streaming Netflix. Damage assessments were routinely fabricated. 'It's easier,' one staffer told us. When we reported it, investigators asked, 'Did anyone take the money?' We said no. They lost interest. It got worse. FEMA approved leasing $46 million in pumps that could have been bought for $4 million. A whistleblower who reported this later died under suspicious circumstances — his body was cremated without an autopsy, despite requests for a forensic review. FEMA's response? Nothing. At the core was FEMA's unique DEI mandate: 80 percent of positions had to be filled locally, regardless of qualifications. Only 25 percent of residents were fluent in English, and fewer than one-third held college degrees. This created a woeful mismatch between mission needs and personnel. The federal coordinating officer had told us, 'I wish I had retired execs who just want to do the right thing.' We recruited just such a team, but we were then sidelined during our time in Puerto Rico from July 2018 to June 2019, largely due to discrimination. Merit was irrelevant. FEMA handed its critical improvement program to a young woman who epitomized quota-driven hiring. Enrolled in law school, she unabashedly prioritized classes over work, failed our Lean Six Sigma training, tried to steal test material, and colluded with the prime contractor to dilute requirements. We reported her, but she was protected. We faced relentless discrimination for being 'the straight old white guys.' Some managers mocked us in Spanish. FEMA's Equal Employment Opportunity office 'lost' our complaints five times. The lead counselor was fired the day before the investigation was set to begin. Discrimination was later confirmed by FEMA's Office of Professional Responsibility, but the findings were suppressed for six years. When we filed a Freedom of Information Act request for the report, FEMA redacted it entirely — including the page numbers. We brought our findings to Congress and the Inspector General but were ignored. Freedom of Information requests were stonewalled. FEMA's Freedom of Information office withheld records — even from Congress. That's not incompetence — it's obstruction. After exhausting every avenue — facing retaliation, smear campaigns, and sabotage — we filed lawsuits. Seven are now active, three of them naming FEMA. They were filed just before the statutes of limitations expired, only because FEMA's Whistleblower Protection Unit, Equal Employment Opportunity office, and Freedom of Information teams delayed resolution for years. Legal costs now exceed $700,000 — and we haven't even set foot in court yet. The strategy is attrition: Bury the truth in paperwork and delay. It is now 2025, and Puerto Rico's recovery remains incomplete. Its power grid is fragile. Two near-total blackouts in six months confirmed what we already knew: FEMA failed — and still is failing. In a real national emergency, FEMA will not be the answer. U.S. Northern Command, the National Guard, the Defense Logistics Agency, and hardened continuity-of-government military sites like Cheyenne Mountain and Raven Rock are the real backstops — not FEMA bureaucrats. Even in routine disasters, FEMA doesn't do the heavy lifting during the response. That falls to the Army Corps of Engineers, local EMS, and the Red Cross. In recovery, FEMA behaves like a bloated, poorly run insurance company — slow to pay, hostile to oversight, and incapable of learning. We have kept fighting because this isn't about FEMA's image. It is about lives. Americans are being failed by a $33 billion bureaucracy that delivers PowerPoints instead of progress. FEMA doesn't go to where the work happens, embrace problems, or fix them. Rather, it hides failures, punishes dissent, and rewards mediocrity. In FEMA's culture, the nail that sticks up doesn't just get hammered back down — it gets audited, reassigned, or made to disappear. It embodies the very things the Lean Six Sigma management approach was intended to eliminate — overburden, waste, and unevenness. If FEMA were a company, it would be bankrupt. If a military unit, it would be relieved of command. Instead, it limps along—propped up by Cold War nostalgia and D.C. inertia. President Trump has spoken of dismantling it. He cannot do it soon enough. He should devolve emergency operations to the states via block grants. Let the military handle large-scale logistics. Bring back transparency, urgency, and accountability. It can't happen overnight, of course, but it must begin. States must be gradually and strategically weaned — both operationally and financially — from FEMA's central role in disaster recovery. This phased approach should prioritize high-aid, high-frequency states, based on disaster frequency and severity. States facing similar risks should form regional pacts to share resources and coordinate surge response. This starts with honest assessments of each state's disaster history, capacity, and capability gaps. It includes inventories of personnel, materiel, and clearly defined responsibilities. States should formalize mutual-aid agreements to offset localized shortfalls. And FEMA reservists should be retained in a modified form to provide flexible, rapid-deployment surge staffing when disasters exceed state capacity. We used to joke that if you sent FEMA managers out to get you a Big Mac and a Coke, they'd come back with a kitten, a pincushion, a harmonica — and not a single receipt. When the next real emergency hits, FEMA won't save anyone. Americans deserve better than the bureaucratic cosplay we witnessed when we tried in vain to fix. It is not ending FEMA, but continuing to fund FEMA that is radical. Barry Angeline, a retired business executive, led the FEMA Lean Six Sigma effort in Puerto Rico. Col. Dan McCabe (U.S. Army, Ret.), two-time Bronze Star recipient, served as a senior consultant for FEMA Lean Six Sigma in Puerto Rico. Both are federal whistleblowers. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Trump directs a new threat at Elon Musk, with an eye toward the 2026 midterm elections
Trump directs a new threat at Elon Musk, with an eye toward the 2026 midterm elections

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Trump directs a new threat at Elon Musk, with an eye toward the 2026 midterm elections

As Donald Trump's relationship with Elon Musk imploded last week, the president and his top campaign donor didn't just throw random rhetorical punches. Their feud included rather specific threats. In fact, on Thursday afternoon, in the midst of an online volley, Trump wrote, 'The easiest way to save money in our Budget, Billions and Billions of Dollars, is to terminate Elon's Governmental Subsidies and Contracts.' At least so far, there's been no White House follow-through on this, and for the most part, the intensity of the conflict appears to have subsided. But it was against this backdrop that the president spoke to 'Meet the Press' host Kristen Welker by phone over the weekend and added a fresh threat to the conversation. NBC News reported: President Donald Trump on Saturday said there would be 'serious consequences' if tech mogul Elon Musk funds Democratic candidates to run against Republicans who vote in favor of the GOP's sweeping budget bill. When Welker asked, 'Are you concerned that Elon Musk could start funding Democratic candidates?' the president responded, 'If he does, he'll have to pay the consequences for that.' Pressed for details as to what that might entail, the Republican added, 'I'm not going to say, but he'll have to pay very serious consequences if he does that.' As a practical matter, it was easy to understand why Trump might be concerned about this. Last fall, Musk was the Republican Party's most important megadonor. Indeed, The Washington Post reported earlier this year that, based on the final available tally, the billionaire spent at least $288 million to help elect Trump and other Republican candidates in the 2024 cycle. It stands to reason that the party would welcome similar investments in the 2026 midterm elections, though last week, while complaining about the GOP's domestic policy megabill — the inaptly named 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' — Musk wrote, 'In November next year, we fire all politicians who betrayed the American people.' This led to a related social media item in which Musk added, 'A new political party is needed in America to represent the 80% in the middle! ... This is Fate.' While there's obviously all kinds of time between now and Election Day 2026, this did not sound like a billionaire ready to write generous checks to his erstwhile Republican allies. But there's a more important dimension to all of this: Politicians, at least in this in country, do not generally warn private citizens — out loud, in public, on the record — that they'll be punished for contributing to a different party. In fact, I honestly can't think of a comparable example to this. Trump is a sitting president, effectively telling his top campaign donor that he's prepared to use the power of his office to impose 'very serious consequences' on his former ally if Musk dares to support candidates the Republican doesn't like. Under normal circumstances, and in a healthy political environment, a threat like this one would itself constitute a significant political controversy. This article was originally published on

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store