Celebrating Our Religious Freedom

The following letter (italics) was recently submitted to a conservative Roman Catholic U.S. website in an honest effort to gain some insight on several distinct politically motivated issues.  Whether or not you agree with the viewpoints in this letter is not the issue.  Nor is a question of who is right and who is wrong about the various issues facing many Roman Catholics today.  What is of concern is that so many adult Christians seem to submit to the opinion of others rather than searching their own hearts through the gifts of the Holy Spirit which they received following the Sacrament of Confirmation. Surely God’s gift of faith is unique to each individual and can only be celebrated when we learn to trust directly in our hearts rather than by simply abrogating this gift to others?  To do so will only lead to a continued and destructive form of co-dependency. Remember God accepts us where we are - not where others would have us be.          

I am a relatively new Catholic (2 years confirmed on May 1, so please be patient with me), and am running into some confusion over the correct balance between obedience to the Bishops and where prudential judgment comes into play when it comes to the matter of finding political solutions to problems. I tend to run into Catholics, either in person or online, who fall into one of two categories: (a) Everything the Bishop says or supports is 100% gospel truth and you are not Catholic if you don't automatically jump on the bandwagon of whatever the Bishop is promoting right now, and (b) Everything the Bishop says is just a suggestion and you can make your own judgment about these things. Position B is obviously wrong. No question in my mind on that one. But where I am confused is on Position A and to what degree we are to submit our own logic and reason to the opinion of the Bishop on political matters when you disagree with the manner of implementation of our moral principles. I was under the impression that the Church and the Bishops are to teach the moral principles that should undergird our solutions, but that the actual work of solving these problems falls to the laity and implementation itself is a matter of prudential judgment so long as we are working within the boundaries of those moral teachings. I've read quite a few things lately that suggest (or flat-out say) that this is wrong and that we are supposed to submit ourselves to whatever the Bishops think on matters of implementation.

Now, for me issues such as abortion and SSM are no- brainers. The Bishops teach that intentionally killing an unborn person is wrong. Therefore abortion must always be wrong because it is the intentional killing of an unborn person.That's a pretty direct correlation. Same thing for the issue of same-sex unions. But when it comes to other political matters I get very confused.

For example (and this is only one of many I could give), the current illegal immigration debate. The Bishops have lent their support to the current "comprehensive" bill. Now as far as the morals undergirding their position, I agree completely that all people have intrinsic value and should be treated with dignity and respect. So I can agree that we should not be kicking down doors and dragging kids out of their parents arms and I also agree that no entity should interfere with the Church's ability to minister to people, regardless of their status.

But when it comes to supporting this bill, I have issues. First, I don't think it's a good idea to do "comprehensive" anything. Look at Obama-care for the prime example of the kind of gigantic mess these types of bill cause. There are also, historically, lots of awful little surprises tucked into these type of bills that come back to bite us eventually and has we known that x was snuck in there we might not have supported it. In this particular bill it's just come out that there is a biometric database of all US citizens that would be implemented if the bill passes and is signed into law. Hello, Big Brother! Second, I would rather this be done in pieces and in the daylight- instead of in back rooms between "gangs" where who knows who is even writing these bills, and we all know no one reads them- so we can see what is actually passing, and make sure it is actually implemented.

So I guess my question is am I a bad Catholic because I would see this problem be solved in pieces instead of defaulting to the "comprehensive" position of the Bishops? I have these same views on a lot of other subjects as well. Economics and the reach and role of government are other areas in which I struggle with their conclusions. I agree with the moral premises that the Bishops teach us (keeping the well being of the poor front and center) but I disagree with the various methods of implementations that they endorse and I think that some of what they endorse does not help the poor in the long term and undermines our position and our charitable mission in communities and the lives of individuals. Is is OK for me to see the implementation part a different way or does that make me a bad Catholic or a cafeteria Catholic?

Sorry to write a book for you. But I truly want to be loyal to the teachings of Our Lord and His Church and in this area I am really struggling to see things clearly.

Thanks so much for your time!

Again, as a reminder, you may not agree with the writer’s position on some of the issues, but he/she has every right and duty under canon law, to express them without fear of condemnation.  My sole purpose in bringing this matter to the fore is to ask ‘why, as adults, does your religious institution not teach us to rely on our unique gift of the Holy Spirit?’   

“But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.”  John 14:26

 
Roman Catholic adults should be encouraged to trust in their hearts, the place where their treasure lies. See also 1 Corinthians 13:11. All Church teachings and other trusted teachers who understand this can be helpful, but until such time that we have come to rely on ‘the God within’ we probably have not learned to trust in God as well as our hearts.

For those who feel they must obey church teachings or have difficulty accepting them remember that Vatican II established for the first time in church’s history, that an informed conscience will always take primacy over any church teachings.  As such Roman Catholics are asked to discover the depths of their own conscience. To obey one’s conscience is the very dignity of the human person; according to it the human person will be judged. See Pastoral Constitution of the Church in the Modern World n. 16 and the Declaration on Religious Freedom, nn. 2,3,14.

Great spiritual teachers, be they bishops, deacons, Popes, etc. will always tell you “except for our Creator we as adults cannot expect others to direct or be responsible for our spiritual growth and development.

Addendum August 26, 2013:

Freedom

Jesus’ notion of the Kingdom is a different understanding of freedom than that of most religious and secular leaders today. We think of freedom as not having to do what we don’t want to do, but divine freedom is the capacity to be fully who we already are, to develop our inherent and true nature, as much as possible—really wanting to do what we know we have to do. Only God can create that freedom inside of us. Love can only proceed from such inner freedom. A mustard seed, yeast, and light—that all develop from within—are some of Jesus’ central metaphors for this freedom-loving Reign of God. Paul just calls it “grace.” For him grace and freedom are almost the same thing (see Ephesians 2:7-10, Galatians 5:1). And I would add to that “heaven.” Freedom, grace, and heaven are the same thing.

Secular freedom only creates individualists and private freedom, but not a society. It never gets around to the common good, which is a central principle of the Gospel and Catholic social teaching, which instead demands from you and demands for others—while ironically giving you all that you really need. Then you become who you most deeply and truly are, a member of a family, a neighborhood, a society, and a planet. If you are trying to “go to heaven” alone or on your own merits, you are preparing for a place other than heaven. - Fr. Richard Rohr, OFM

 

   

 

 

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.    

A Listening Heart

A rabbi was once trying to persuade a self-proclaimed atheist to perform a good deed. In explaining why he considered such deeds to be useless, the atheist said, “You know rabbi, I do not believe in G-d.” The rabbi replied, “The G-d that you do not believe in, I do not believe in either.” M.M. Schneerson

In recent times I have observed a great tension around the word ‘obedience’ as it relates to religion. To many people, it seems to suggest an unquestioning obedience to the institution while for others, it simply means obedience to God. These are polar positions no matter how eloquently the institution tries to describe or skirt around the issue. For Jesus, obedience to God is synonymous to being obedient to the ‘heart’. And while it may take us a lifetime to reach this level, Jesus saw it in many children. Perhaps it is the grime of daily living - the exposure to so much pain and suffering that causes us to close our hearts. Only when we are removed from the burden of competition, the desire to be number one and the deceptions created by our ego’s, can we again learn to trust in and listen to the quiet voice within. Only as the pursuit for security, money and recognition begins to fade with age or life changing circumstance can we safely return to experience the embrace of the patient God within. Slowly we can then begin to undo the chains and shackles that demand that we interpret our understanding of God through the filters of an institutional religion.

It is true - religion can help us maintain our connection with God during that period in life when we seemed to have given up on our heart. It is true that institutional religion can bring us to levels of comfort needed at a time of crisis such as death and sickness. It is true that religion can provide us with a wonderful sense of celebrating community. It is true that religion can bring us to a deeper understanding of our role and purpose during our brief existence on this planet. It is also true that religion has brought us many heroes and heroines to help us overcome adversity. But it is also true that institutional religion has brought the world much pain and suffering.

It is perhaps due to the ongoing global turmoil that many people are now expressing their disappointment and frustration with religion. The answers provided by the institution simply may not have been satisfactory or brought the peace and understanding they were seeking. In the absence of a listening heart some people have chosen to abandon their faith or adopted a new religion. Still others have given up on religion entirely and declared themselves as atheist or non believers.

Today, many of us are struggling with our image of God. There are still so many who believe in a punishing God who demands a strict obedience to the rules - a God who keeps a detailed record of our ‘rights’ and ‘wrongs’. Theirs is a God who keeps a tight control over who gets into heaven and who will spend an eternity in hell. Theirs is a God who condemns anyone who challenges religious Tradition. Or an impotent God who needs us to fight his religious wars – be it a battle against unbelievers, terrorist, abortionist, democrats, or new agers, etc. etc.? And according to some, a final battle needs to be fought between ‘good’ and ‘evil’ bringing the earth to an cataclysmic end.

Seldom, a day goes by, when an idea perceived to be in contrast to ‘established religion’ does not need to be slain and conquered. As it has been said before, we seem to have created a God in our image rather than remembering that it is the other way around. If only we would relearn to embrace our unconditionally loving Creator with the same fervour we extend to religious dogma and doctrine, we would once again begin to hear his quiet voice.