Politicizing Faith: The Real Threat to Our Freedom of Religion

It's no secret that politics and religion tend to be two hot topics that seem to always be intimately entwined with one another in the public eye.  This is especially true here in the United States, where the First Amendment of our Constitution states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."  Most people are familiar with this Amendment, and have very strong opinions about it one way or another.  Some use it to argue for the exclusion of all religious expression from any government-associated organization, and others, in all honesty, use it as a way of defending their own attempts to force their religious beliefs on others.

Catholics are no strangers to the almost constant tension between religion and politics.  On the surface-level, the United States Catholic Church seems to try and keep a neutral tone when dealing with politics.  Priests aren't supposed to endorse political candidates or try to sway their congregations one way or another when voting (though some do).  Both the Democratic and Republican party claim to value issues that Catholics themselves are supposed to be concerned for (however, social justice issues seem to always take a backseat to pro-life rhetoric), so technically speaking, a Catholic shouldn't hold allegiance to one party at all times, and should be open to exploring which candidate addresses the issues best that Catholics hold as important.  All very neutral and reasonable sounding...in theory.  In practice, the United States Catholic Church is far from neutral, and much of that has to do with the Bishops, their hard-line outspokenness on certain issues, and their insistence that our religious liberty is under attack.

Many Bishops are loud voices in the political arena, whether they admit it or not.  Here's why they're wrong to be.

Recently, a colleague of mine drew my attention to a blog-post that focused on the ten presidential/vice-presidential candidates for the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (the winners have been selected, by the way, with Cardinal Daniel DiNardo of Houston-Galveston being elected president and Archbishop José Gomez of Los Angeles elected vice president).  The post was looking at how each of the ten Bishops have approached LGBTQ issues in the past, and, unsurprisingly, most of them didn't have very positive responses in their history (a few, surprisingly, did).  Many Bishops in the United States have been criticized for not embracing Pope Francis' more pastoral vision of the Church, which includes acknowledging the human dignity for people who identify as LGBTQ and ministering to them with love and compassion, even if the Church's stance on same-sex relationships has not changed.  The U.S. Bishops as a whole (I know there are individual exceptions) seem much more concerned with upholding dogma and keeping believers in line than encouraging dialogue and compassion towards not only LGBTQ issues, but also women's reproductive issues, and interfaith engagement.  Sound a little harsh?  Maybe, but that's the reality of the situation.

As I was reading about the Bishops, some of the actions several of them took in opposing LGBTQ rights was not only disappointing, but infuriating and appalling.  On Bishop barred LGBTQ people from public ministry, banned children of same-sex couples from Catholic schools, and voiced the desire to push anyone who isn't one hundred percent in line with Catholic teaching out of the Church so that it could be a smaller, more orthodox community.  Another Bishop opposed the teaching of LGBTQ history in public schools, and signed a letter opposing the re-authorization of an act that would protect women against violence because it included sexual orientation and gender identity as protected classes.  Another Bishop attempted to ban Catholics who supported same-sex marriage, simply supported it, from receiving communion, and another told Church workers they would lose their jobs if they supported same-sex marriage, and shut down ministry services to gay and lesbian communities.  These actions aren't just examples of poor leadership or a galling lack of compassion for people of faith, whether LGBTQ identified or not, these are dangerous mindsets that very influential people in the Church possess and act upon, despite the overwhelming majority of Catholic laity opposing such beliefs and actions.  Given the nation's current tumultuous political climate, coupled with the hate crimes that have taken place since the election, the discriminatory actions of these leaders needs to be seriously looked at and they need to be held accountable for their part in spreading hate and mistrust among American Catholics.

This isn't the only thing that the Church needs to be called out on, however.  In general, the United States Bishops' rhetoric that religious liberty in this country is under attack needs to be examined.  While reading the same blog-post, I stumbled upon a campaign the Bishops launched back before same-sex marriage was the law of the land called "Fortnight for Freedom", which was essentially a two-week campaign filled with prayer vigils, rallies, and other politically charged activities.  The message that the Bishops were pushing was that religious freedom is under attack in the United States.  Among the issues the Bishops cited to back up this claim was the idea that expanding LGBTQ equality, specifically same-sex marriage, as well as government-mandated birth control coverage for most employers were direct attacks on people's right to religious freedom.

Whether or not you think he's a good president,
you have to admit, the man has a way with words

Here's the deal, religious freedom in this country means that everyone has a right to practice and express their own belief or faith, or non-faith, without fear of persecution or censure (unless your religious practices somehow harm others or impeded upon their own civil liberties).  It also means that we cannot force our religious beliefs onto other people, especially through legislation.  President Obama summed up this issue quite bluntly when he said "No, you can't deny women their basic rights and pretend it's about your 'religious freedom'.  If you don't like birth control, don't use it.  Religious freedom doesn't mean you can force others to live by your own beliefs."

Now, I'm not naive enough to believe that religion has no affect on politics and legislation whatsoever.  We are each formed by our faith and beliefs.  Our morals and values are shaped by our faith and beliefs, and they will be reflected in how we vote and who we vote for.  However, to claim that our religious freedom is somehow under attack because the rights and freedom of another group are upheld is ludicrous.  Christianity has been the dominant religion in this country for much of its history, so our politics and legislation up until now have obviously reflected the beliefs and values of that specific faith.  As our country becomes increasingly diverse and more religions and systems of belief come into the mainstream, a more balanced, neutral approach to people's rights is going to be necessary.  If Christian denominations don't support same-sex marriage, that's fine.  Churches are within their rights to say they will not perform or recognize those marriages.  Churches do not have the right to say the government has to refuse to recognize and perform those marriages, however, because the government is supposed to uphold and protect the rights of all people, not just a select few.  Churches can preach against the use of birth control, and push for abstinence-only education in private schools all they want, but they do not have the right to dictate on a national scale who has the right to birth control, or what kind of education public schools should be presenting.  Freedom of religion doesn't simply protect religions from government control, it also protects the people from religious control.

I'll probably get a lot of push back for this post, but the reality is that Christianity is not under attack in this country.  There is no war on religion (unless you're Muslim, let's be honest here), and no one is trouncing on your religious rights because they want to buy a cake for their same-sex wedding.  People are free to worship how they want, believe what they want, and that is the beautiful thing about this country.  Whether you think someone is right or wrong is totally your prerogative, but to force them to live how you think people should live and take away their freedom to choose their own path and their own life because your beliefs are different then theirs is about as un-American as you can get.

So, with all due respect to the Bishops, I think it's time they put more focus on ministering to the faithful, helping those in need, and supporting social efforts to create a better society on the whole, and spend a lot less time trying to control how people live their lives.  We're all just trying to figure out how to live in this world, how to be in relationship with each other, but we need to be able to choose for ourselves how we live.  As Catholics, we believe God gave us free will so that we could choose to be in relationship with each other and with God, but what good is that free will, how meaningful is that choice, when our religious leaders try to force the decision onto us by influencing our politics and legislation?  Our government is supposed to faciliate our right to choose, and our faith is supposed to help us make those choices...not take those choices from us.  

Until next time,
Erin