The framers of the United States Constitution could not have been clearer about their feelings concerning the church-state relationship. The First Amendment to the Constitution provides “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press: or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Yet, it is and will continue to be a controversial topic of discussion and especially so in today’s divisive rhetoric concerning the role government should play in our daily lives.

A couple of scenarios involving church-state relations are presently front and center in my hometown of Pueblo and the larger Catholic community in Denver which deserve consideration.

Chris Nicoll, a Republican and previous city councilor, applied to fill a vacancy on Pueblo City Council. He was not selected to fill the position. As a result, in keeping true to the Republican Party belief that most elections are rigged or tainted in some way, Nicoll cried foul and filed ethical complaints against two sitting city councilors, Dennis Flores and Regina Maestri alleging they are “corrupt officials” pursuant to a report by Lindsey Jensen in June 2024.

Stay up to speed: Sign up for daily opinion in your inbox Monday-Friday

Flores is a democrat and Maestri is a Republican and both opposed Nicoll’s appointment. Though the city election of council members claims to be non-partisan, party affiliation in elections is the worst kept secret in Pueblo.

Nicoll claims his membership with a Christian religious organization called Forging Pueblo was a primary reason Flores voted against him. Flores denies the allegation and questioned why he, who claims Christianity as his religion of choice, would discriminate against his own religion.

Forging Pueblo is a Colorado non-profit organization that states its goal is to significantly influence Pueblo with a biblical worldview and believe its community reach should touch the following spheres: church, business, government, education, media/news, arts/entertainment and family. Forging Pueblo has been actively involved in endorsing candidates for public office.

Even assuming Flores did vote against Nicoll because he is involved with Forging Pueblo, Nicoll chooses to ignore the fact Forging Pueblo is a political force in the community and, therefore, is fair game in distinguishing how its values conflict with differing political beliefs. For example, Forging Pueblo vigorously opposed the opening of an abortion clinic in Pueblo and enlisted national support from the pro-life movement. Not surprisingly, their efforts were widely criticized by pro-choice advocates.

To suggest it was an attack against their religious beliefs because pro-choice advocates also believe deeply in their convictions completely ignores the fact Forging Pueblo pursuant to their selected spheres of influence and specific involvement in state action opened the door to legitimate debate concerning their political beliefs. Therefore, Nicoll should not complain.

Forging Pueblo is not the only religious nonprofit that blurs the line between church-state involvement. The Catholic Church is an unabashed participant in partisan politics and should also be held accountable both in its nonprofit status and anti-Christian policies. Denver archbishop Samuel Aquila has used his influence to espouse homophobic and transphobic rhetoric on numerous occasions.

Aquila was instrumental in the publication of a 17-page document specifically advising administrators of Catholic schools in the diocese to prohibit the enrollment of transgender and non-gender conforming parents and treating gay parents differently than heterosexual couples. Because the schools are private and theoretically do not receive public funding they are free to define the parameters of enrollment including the discrimination of students based on gender identification.

Aquila previously said, “Colorado is a very libertarian state. Many of its people are socially liberal and have surrendered to secular humanism.” As a result, “The challenges for the Church in this culture are great.” Certainly sounds like a political statement to me.

Because hypocrisy has no bounds, the Archdiocese of Denver sued the state of Colorado for refusing to allow its Catholic church schools to receive public funding for pre-school because they were in violation of the state’s anti-discrimination policy which includes discriminating against any person on the basis of gender. The state subsequently removed the non-discrimination clause from the universal preschool provider agreement for the 2024-2025 school year.

Aquila and other Catholic church leaders have taken it upon themselves to refuse sacraments to politicians who subscribe to the Catholic faith and are pro-choice in the abortion debate. Some church leaders have given political speeches from the pulpit, endorsed political candidates, political platforms and in church newsletters railed against those who are accused of violating church doctrine.

Let me be clear: church leaders are entitled to exercise their right to freedom of speech and be protected in their publications concerning their personal political beliefs so long as they do not do so on behalf of the Catholic church. When they speak on behalf of the church they have crossed the line of church-state separation and should lose their non-profit 501(c)(3) protection and be required to pay taxes. In essence, they have become a political action group and should be regulated and treated as such.

Although I have been a member of the Catholic church for 78 years I no longer tithe to the Catholic church  because of leaders like Aquila and those who choose to use the pulpit for political purposes. I believe I am justified for non-tithing on the basis I do not wish to contribute to a political entity that does not necessarily represent my world views on social and political issues.

In a nutshell,  politicians like Nicoll and Aquila should not be provided the choice to use their religious affiliation to protect them from political attack and at the same time use it to benefit their personal and religious causes. When they choose to do so they are subject to all the rhetoric that engulfs the political arena including criticism of their political beliefs clothed in the self fulfilling protection of church dogma.

Dennis Maes served 24 years as a 10th Judicial District judge in Pueblo and was chief judge for 17 of those years. He previously served as director of Pueblo County Legal Services, Inc.; as a public defender and as an attorney in private practice.