Religious Freedom fail

"Secular freedom is having to do what you want to do.  Religious freedom is wanting to do what you have to do."   Richard Rohr, Everything Belongs.

A recent editorial in a Canadian Catholic weekly suggested that Canadian Catholics may be at risk of losing their religious freedom. This is not only totally false but completely contradicts the modern safeguards that are in place to guarantee all Canadians the safety to practise their faith without any interference from the state or other religious groups.  When we allow our conscience to be formed by God nothing can violate that or stand against it.  That same God will help us to overcome any situations which could cause us any personal conflict. Institutional rules and regulations should always follow the need to serve the greater good.   

In the Western world, including Canada and the USA, the ‘Separation of State and Church or Religion’ specifically provides for such freedom. While such separation prevents the State from supporting any religion or from interfering with it also obliges religion to leave the public sphere open to all. When both sides respect the boundaries, secularism provides a framework for freedom of conscience, tolerance and democracy. Secularism does not guarantee human rights but it helps make them possible.

This is obviously a thorn in the side of the American bishops who want direct control and influence over national policies and politics (as they once did for centuries).  Is it because they want to introduce legislation that would criminalize abortion and homosexuality, among other matters?   The fact that the Vatican is the only western nation that has refused to sign the 2006 UN declaration that de-criminalizes homosexual behaviour should sound alarm bells about the overall aims of these bishops.   Are they opposing the implementation a national health program to divert Catholics from their real objectives.  Surely these bishops recognize that such a health program is intended to serve the poorest of the poor?  What then has happened to the Catholic understanding about ‘the fundamental option of the poor’ when an estimated 40 million American cannot afford basic health care?       

According to official polls the vast majority of Canadian Catholics are opposed to abortion in general.  But they also understand that there are exceptions under which abortion can be allowed and approved. Who would write these guidelines, when the majority of US bishops seem to demand that there cannot be any exceptions?  What has happened to compassion and understanding when these issues are presented in absolute terms?  Nowhere in the bible will anyone find Jesus accusing sinners of being ‘intrinsically evil/disordered, or in a state of grave depravity’. Removing these terms from the current catechism would go a long way to take away the very fuel homophobic bigots use to justify bullying in school yards.   Recognizing that homosexuality in some countries is punishable by torture and death why does the Church still single out homosexuals over all other sins? Why has the Vatican not signed the UN declaration to decriminalize homosexuality?  At the very least should the Catholic Church not call for an end to these brutal actions in countries which continue to view homosexuality as a crime?

The question of religious liberty or conscience is being obfuscated when it is suggested that a relationship between God and a person can somehow be restricted.  God gave us free choice should religious institutions not follow suit? 

UPDATE:  reported by The Tablet (UK) August 30/2012  

Tunisia introduces blasphemy bill

30 August 2012

Christian and human rights groups have expressed concern about the ruling Islamist party in Tunisia introducing a Blasphemy Bill. It will make "insults, profanity, derision, and representation of Allah and Muhammad" punishable by up to two years in prison or a significant fine, with repeat offenders facing four years behind bars.

John Pontifex, from Aid to the Church in Need, a charity that helps persecuted Christians, warned that under Pakistan's blasphemy laws, extremists "take matters into their own hands and mete out ‘justice', committing heinous crimes against people whom they decide are guilty, totally ignoring due legal process".

The Barnabas Fund, which also assists Christians facing discrimination, noted that the introduction of the bill "indicates the increasing strength of Islam in public life in Tunisia, which before the Arab Spring was one of the most secular countries in the region."

Is this the kind of religious 'freedom', our bishops are hoping to implement?

 http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2012/11/15/ireland-abortion-law-savita-halappanavar.html

abortion and your conscience

The ongoing debate about abortion has prompted me to post yet another blog about the subject. Again, allow me to state categorically I AM OPPOSED TO ABORTION !! However, I believe there are extreme circumstances and exceptions that require more understanding than just a simple statement, such as made recently on both sides of our border, by members of the clergy; stating that abortion cannot be permitted under any circumstances . At no time did either bishop suggest that such a decision can only be made through a powerful prayerful appeal to God that leaves the concerned individual with a clear conscience. To pronounce judgment after fact is clearly wrong.

It is a sad fact that Catholics, and others, are not taught to trust in a God who will speak directly to our needs and fears. It's too bad that some Catholics do not familiarize themselves with their rights under Canon Law as well as their liabilities under Concordats. It is indeed a sorrowful situation in which Catholics are discouraged from reading the Bible for the purpose of gaining a better understanding of God's compassion and forgiveness. It is sad fact that Catholics and others have lost their connection with nature. Through our narrow understanding we failed to see the Holy Water that consists of the Great Lakes and the Oceans and all the other waters around us.

When I read the story about the woman in Phoenix and Sr. Margaret McBride for the first time I wondered immediately why Bishop Olmstead felt it was necessary to go public and emphatically announce the Church's teaching position on abortion, as if it wasn't already known. More importantly why harass the mother and her religious supporter any further on this matter? Hadn't they suffered or punished enough by the Church? Sr. McBride had served at the hospital for more than thirty years – does anyone think she and the mother took the decision lightly and without any consultation with God? Or does the Church's stance on morality trump that of the Holy Spirit? This same attitude was more recently endorsed by Canadian Cardinal Marc Oullette when he stated that there should be no exceptions for abortions.

It is time for the Church (and some militant pro-life groups) to stop pontificating and expressing morals only in strict absolute and judicial terms especially on matters so intensely private. Instead the Church has a duty to guide us towards our hearts where we will find the answers within.

All Catholics have the right to follow their informed consciences in all matters (Canon 748,1). Furthermore, as Catholics we have a moral right and responsibility under Canon Law to express publicly our dissent in regard to decisions made by church authorities (C212,C.218,C.753).

Clearly the Vatican II fathers recognized that obedience to a higher norm takes precedence over worldly authority as follows:

Deep within their consciences men and women discover a law that they have not laid upon themselves but which they must obey. Its voice, ever calling them to love and to do what is good and to avoid what is evil, tells them inwardly at the right moment: do this, shun that. For they have in their hearts a law inscribed by God. Their dignity lies in observing this law, and by it they will be judged . . . By conscience that law is made known in a wonderful that is fulfilled in love for God and for one's neighbour. Through loyalty to conscience Christians are joined to others in the search for truth and for the right solution to so many moral problems that arise both in the lives of individuals and in social relationships. - Pastoral Constitution on the Modern World

Perhaps a new sacrament needs to be introduced, similar to a 'rite of passage' that finally severs our umbilical cord from the religious institution – a kind of graduation ceremony. As adults we need to take responsibility for our own spiritual development including all moral and ethical decisions. Certainly the Church can assist and guide us to develop higher forms of ethics and morals but it must recognize that ultimately it is we who need to take responsibility for our decisions. Condemnation after the fact is not the way taught by Jesus. Catholics and indeed other Christian religious institutions need to defer to the Holy Spirit that exists within each human being. Finally, does scripture not clearly state: "But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you everything, and remind you of all that I have said to you."(John 14:26)?

The debate about Bishop Olmstead is far from over and resurfaced  when he recently stated that the Hospital failed to respect his authority and demanded that it could subsequently no longer be recognized as a Catholic institution.    

On religious fundamentalism

Jacob wrestles with Angel
by Delacroix (Genesis. 32:26-28)

As a religious convert in the mid eighties, I struggle with a number of religious teachings . Not because I think they are necessarily right or wrong but because they are often stated in unbending legalistic terms.

Many religious teachings have become inflexible over time and have produced a back-ward orientation. In the hands of fundamentalist they are dangerous weapons of judgment and condemnation. Many religious beliefs surrounding homosexuality, abortion, same-sex marriage etc., are now expressed in militant terms. An increasingly zealous approach to religion has been responsible for many random acts of violence throughout the world. Fundamentalism, it must be admitted, is completely devoid of God's gift of compassion. Have we perhaps forgotten that God's gift of compassion and understanding reaches far beyond the written word?

To the fundamentalist, a 'true believer' is someone prepared to submit to an unquestioning obedience to religious teaching. To a struggling member of a religious institution, it can bring both fear and distrust. Any suggestion which hints at the introduction of change, is frequently met with fear and suspicion. Even the mere act of questioning established dogma and doctrine teachings can be considered heresy in some religious circles, while a virtual anathema or a promise of hell awaits those who dare to openly challenge these teachings. Because virtually all world religious teachings, and their interpretation, are usually held in the hands of a select few, they are not held subject to individual interpretation. But it is important to note that our unquestioning dependence on religious dogma is a relatively new phenomenon. According to respected historians such as Karen Armstrong, fundamentalism first surfaced as recently as the nineteenth century. Since then it has bred the foundation for much religious strife in the world today. Until the twentieth century "the Catholic Church presented itself internally and to the world at large, as the church that did not change. It took great care, as well, to show a united front on all issues and to deal swiftly and discreetly with any occurrences within the church that might seem to suggest otherwise." ( J. W. O'Malley What Happened at Vatican II (2008),P. 34.)

.

But then came Vatican II (1962-1965). For the first time in its two-thousand year history the church showed a desire to accept change from the outside. At its conclusion Dominican Edward Schillebeeckx of Nijmegen University called it "the triumph of anti-triumphal ism"—the rejection by the council of the world-hating, anathema-hurling Counter Reformation conviction that Catholicism alone possessed the truth of life. In contrast to past councils, which devoted much of their time consigning to eternal flames those who did not agree with majority decisions, Vatican II issued no such condemnations. On the floor of St. Peter's, Vienna's Franziskus Cardinal Konig argued that the church has much to learn from the world, even from atheism. (Time Magazine Friday, Dec. 17, 1965).

Clearly the Vatican II authors responsible for the following statement recognized that obedience to a higher norm takes precedence over external authority:

Deep within their consciences men and women discover a law that they have not laid upon themselves but which they must obey. Its voice, ever calling them to love and to do what is good and to avoid what is evil, tells them inwardly at the right moment: do this, shun that. For they have in their hearts a law inscribed by God. Their dignity lies in observing this law, and by it they will be judged . . . By conscience that law is made known in a wonderful that is fulfilled in love for God and for one's neighbour. Through loyalty to conscience Christians are joined to others in the search for truth and for the right solution to so many moral problems that arise both in the lives of individuals and in social relationships. - Pastoral Constitution on the Modern World

Regretfully, even as the Church stood on the threshold of change beginning with Vatican II, it has once again expressed fear of change by denouncing various forms of relativism, secularism, liberalism, modernism, capitalism and just about any other 'ism' it can name. Each article of faith is once again protected in an unbending and unchangeable doctrine which if challenged, might reveal a crack in the concrete of its two thousand year history. Its religious dogma is carefully preserved under 2,865 articles of faith contained in the Catechism of the Catholic Church supported by 1,752 rules prescribed in the Code of Canon Law. Both were published after Vatican II under the watchful eye of Cardinal Ratzinger, the future Pope Benedict XVI. The Catechism once again states that "Outside the Church there is no salvation." This statement completely contradicts the pastoral views held by the fathers of Vatican II extending God's salvation to all humankind! Similarly, documents released by the Vatican in recent years, state that the Catholic Church considers itself in sole possession of the complete truth. It appears then that in spite of a brief venture into the future, the Church would prefer to remain locked in a safer past. As a consequence, Catholic theology will probably continue to reflect the mistaken belief that:

As God is unchangeable therefore the church must also resist change. Religious practise must be based on proven doctrinal formulations not subject to modern 'novelties'. The church, while in the world, must resist any integration into the world. Reconciliation with any principles outside the church will ultimately cause irreparable damage to church life and a serious dilution of its teaching.

Is there a way of changing religious teachings that will be less likely to form unbending literal interpretations? Author John W. O'Malley thinks so.He shares the belief that the documents of Vatican II were expressed in a new way of speaking. Its persuasive and inviting language encouraged an inner transformation. O'Malley recognized that "persuaders do not command from on high. Otherwise they would not be persuading but dictating. Persuasion works from the inside out. To be successful, persuaders need to establish an identity between themselves and their audience and make clear that they share the same concerns and even the same sentiments, such as hope, joy, and sadness. Implicit in it, therefore, is an invitation to rise above all pettiness and to strive for an expansive vision and a generous spirit."

The question for many of us at this juncture will be "do we follow a religion rigidly frozen in the past or do we follow a faith based on 'unknowing' but securely guided by a Creator who leads us in the present - safely towards the future? Will it be a religion of the heart or a religion of the head? Perhaps, like Jacob, we will have to struggle with our own internal demons (Ego) to make this decision.

And then finally, religious fundamentalism will eventually give way to religious liberty which recognizes that all of God's creation is Holy and that we are all equally Holy Sons and Daughters of God called to community with one another.

We need not think alike to love alike - David Ferenc