Address on Religious
Liberty
Most Reverend William
E. Lori
Jefferson City,
Missouri
I.
Introduction
A. Let me thank you warmly for the opportunity to address you today
about the topic of protecting,
defending, and fostering religious liberty in the public
square.
In a special way I want to thank the
bishops of the great State of Missouri
for extending the invitation to me to
speak to you today
and the Missouri Catholic Conference
for making this important topic
the focus of your Annual Assembly in
this critical election year.
B. Religious liberty is a gift we must never take for granted
and must remain vigilant in
safeguarding.
We know this from our country’s own
history
and from the history of other nations
that this most precious of our freedoms
can erode or even be lost.
Time and again our Holy Father has
spoken out courageously
on behalf of victims of religious
persecution,
especially those in the Middle East
and Africa.
When a group of U.S. bishops met with
the Holy Father earlier this year,
the Pope delivered an important talk
on religious liberty, in which he said this:
“It is imperative that the entire
Catholic community in the United States
come to realize the grave threats to
the Church’s public moral witness
presented by a radical secularism
which finds increasing expression
in the political and cultural
spheres…
Of particular concern are certain
attempts being made to limit
that most cherished of American freedoms,
the freedom of religion,” the Pope said.
C. To tell the truth, however, many people of good will, including many
fellow Catholics,
do not think that religious freedom
is threatened in the United States.
After all, our churches are open, our
institutions continue to function,
and on the surface it doesn’t seem as
though much has changed.
But we are here to look beneath the
surface,
to see clearly the threats, to
analyze them, and then to resolve to address them
as individuals and as a community of
faith.
II.
The Premier See and Religious Liberty
A. The Archdiocese of Baltimore, which I am now privileged to serve,
is the first Catholic Diocese in the
United States.
Founded in 1789, it is very near to
the very heart of the American experiment
in which the God-given gift of
religious liberty is recognized and protected
in the Declaration of Independence,
the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights.
B. As you know, the First Amendment has two parts:
the first prevents the government
from establishing a single national religion,
and the second part guarantees our
right to the free exercise of religion –
not simply freedom of worship but
indeed the freedom of believers to live their faith,
to influence the culture, to
establish and run institutions like schools and hospitals
in accord with their church’s
teaching, and so forth.
This is one of the primary reasons
why Americans at the close of the 18th century
chose to break with England – to
enjoy and practice religious freedom
which they understood as granted by
God and not by the government.
C. The nation’s first bishop, John Carroll, hailed from a distinguished
Maryland family.
His cousin, Charles Carroll, was
the only Catholic signer of the
Declaration of Independence.
Although the Carroll’s were a
well-to-do and distinguished family,
they were not exempt from the unjust
legal restrictions
which Maryland colonial law imposed
on its Catholic citizens in the 18th century.
Among them was a prohibition against
Catholics holding public office.
Nonetheless active in colonial
politics, Charles Carroll recognized early on
that only independence from the
British crown would bring about
authentic religious and civic freedom
in America.
He risked his life, family, and
property in supporting the revolutionary cause,
but he did so, and I quote:
“To obtain religious as well as civil
liberty” – and he added –
“God grant this religious liberty may
be preserved in these states to the end of time.”
D. The history of our country is replete with anti-Catholic attacks.
We have only to think of the Know
Nothing Party,
the Blaine Amendments, efforts to outlaw
Catholic schools in Oregon,
the anti-Catholic activity of the Ku
Klux Klan, and the like.
Indeed, that anti-Catholic attitude
persists in our culture even today.
Many see the Catholic Church’s
hierarchical structure and moral teaching
as foreign to a completely secular
state.
Anti-Catholicism, sadly, remains an
underlying current that surfaces
whenever the Church is in crisis from
without or from within.
E. By contrast, one who championed the view that it is indeed possible
to be a loyal Catholic and a patriotic
American was one of my many distinguished predecessors, the 9th
Archbishop of Baltimore,
James Cardinal Gibbons, who led the
Archdiocese from 1877 until 1921.
On the one hand, he defended the
proposition
(that one could be a loyal Catholic
and a patriotic American)
against the anti-Catholic attitudes
of his day
and, on the other, against Old World
suspicion of pluralistic democratic government.
Named a Cardinal in 1886, he went to
Rome
to take possession of his titular
Church, Santa Maria in Trastevere,
located on a site where it is said
that Christians worshipped since the 3rd century.
There Gibbons spoke these words:
“For myself, as a citizen of the
United States,
without closing my eyes to our
defects as a nation,
I proclaim with a deep sense of pride
and gratitude,
and in this great capital of
Christendom,
that I belong to a country where the
civil government holds over us
the aegis of its protection without
interfering in the legitimate exercise
of our sublime mission as ministers
of the Gospel of Christ.”
F. Gibbons understood that the American experiment was not perfect
but he championed the view that our
form of government
protects the God-given gift of
religious freedom
and respects the role of churches in
buttressing the moral underpinnings
so essential for the right use of
freedom and for true human flourishing.
By preaching, worship, organized
programs of charity and education,
churches point to the fact that,
although we live in a secular culture,
we human beings have a transcendent
origin and destiny
and that it is our responsibility to
seek the truth and to be formed in virtue.
G. But today, the vision of our founding Fathers –
and Gibbons’ own keen understanding
as to how to actualize that vision –
are being relentlessly challenged by
an overarching secularism
which seeks to marginalize religion,
silence its voice in the public square,
and force its institutions to conform
to secular orthodoxy.
And let’s be honest:
it has become possible to challenge
religious freedom in this way
because so many people have
marginalized religious faith in their own lives.
Catholics and others who no longer
practice the faith contribute to secularism.
To the extent that we fail to bear
witness to our faith and to engage in evangelization,
we too contribute to a secularism
that excludes religious faith from the public square.
Thus, this Year of Faith and the New
Evangelization are linked to religious liberty.
Knowing and loving the Person of
Christ,
rededicating ourselves to knowing,
understanding, and loving the content of the Faith,
asking the Holy Spirit for the grace
to bear witness to the faith
with fresh energy, conviction, and
love –
all this goes hand in hand with
defending religious freedom in our nation!
III.
At the Service of the Common Good
A. One of the ways that secularists seek to marginalize faith is by
embedding in law
a definition of what religion is and
what it is meant to do.
It is an extremely narrow definition
found in the HHS mandate (more on that later)
but also in various state laws.
It is a definition that reduces
freedom of religion to freedom of worship
and seeks to confine the Church’s
activities to the four walls of the parish church.
A church activity is deemed
“religious” only if the church in question
hires mainly its own, serves mainly
its own,
and exists almost exclusively to
inculcate its own doctrine.
But the moment a church seeks to
serve the common good or influence public opinion
then such a church and its activities
are deemed “secular”
and we are told that we must play by
the rules –
and the rules often mean violating
our own teaching, not in preaching, but in practice.
B. By contrast, Pope Benedict points out
that the responsibility of individual
Christians and the Christian community
to love our neighbors as God has loved
us, is at the very heart of the Gospel –
and that from the very beginning the
Church has responded to this Gospel mandate
by means of organized
charities–pooling resources and sharing them with the needy. Catholic Charities programs throughout
Missouri live out this mandate every day,
as do programs of the St. Vincent de
Paul Society and many others.
Affirming the human dignity of all,
but most especially the vulnerable,
and serving the common good of
society –
this is not a secular “add-on” to
church activity
but rather flows from our life of
faith and worship.
What we believe and how we worship,
gives rise to “a charity that evangelizes”
to use the wonderful phrase of
Blessed Pope John Paul II.
And this is expressed in
person-to-person charity,
in our educational and charitable
institutions,
and in our advocacy in the public
square for a just and peaceful society,
an advocacy that is carried on not
from a perspective of blind faith
but rather from a perspective of
reason enlightened by faith.
C. Affirming the dignity of individuals and serving the common good is not
an easy task.
It includes a wide range of human
goods, such as health, education, public safety, etc.
It is not just a question of trying
to bring about
the ‘greatest good for the greatest number’,
for such calculations often exclude
minorities and vulnerable.
Rather, the common good is achieved
when persons are given opportunity to flourish,
to fulfill their God-given potential,
to develop and use their talents,
to flourish physically, socially, and
yes, spiritually and religiously.
Government has a role to play in
bringing about these conditions
and probably it will always be a
matter of debate how extensive that role should be.
Yet, what is often overlooked is the
role of intermediate structures
that help promote the common good,
the conditions for human flourishing.
These intermediate structures include
the family, churches, schools, and
the like.
Think for a moment what the breakdown
of the family has meant for our culture.
Think how many social problems would
be headed off at the pass
if all our children were growing up
in strong families,
with moms and dads who love each
other and their children,
who provide role models and teach
their children how to relate to the opposite sex,
and who impart basic truths and
values, who train their children in virtue.
D. In Maryland and three other states, voters are being urged to be vigorous
in upholding marriage as between one
man and one woman
in referendum votes exactly one month
from today.
I warmly congratulate you and your
fellow citizens of Missouri
for upholding traditional marriage in
your state –
that is a great encouragement for us
in the heat of this battle.
All of us need remember the role of
these intermediate institutions in democracy.
Not only do they help form productive
and enlightened citizens,
they also stand as a buffer between
the power of the state and individual conscience.
E. Without abandoning its legitimate role
in seeing to the health and safety of
its citizens,
our form of government is obliged to
recognize the religious freedom of individuals
and the freedom of religion that
inheres in religious institutions
that serve not only their own members
but also the common good of society.
In a word, protecting the rights and
human dignity of individuals
and serving the common good through a
network of charities and schools
are deeply engrained in the Church’s
mission.
IV.
HHS Mandate
A. Until recently the Federal Government has accommodated churches
seeking to serve the wider society in
accord with the faith that inspires such service.
It has refrained, by and large, from
entangling itself in the internal life of churches
and let them serve the common good
according to their own convictions …
that is, until now.
B. In August 2011, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
published its Preventive Services
Rule and asked for comment.
This rule was part of implementing
the Affordable Care Act.
It required virtually all employers
to provide through their employee benefits plans
abortion-inducing drugs,
sterilization, and contraception.
Religious employers could be exempt
from doing so
if they conformed to a very narrow
definition, which I mentioned already,
namely, the religious employer could
qualify for an exemption
so long as it hires members of that
religion and serves its own members
and existed almost solely to promote
religious doctrine.
Anything else was deemed by the
government as a “secular” enterprise.
If a religious organization hires
people of other faiths,
if it seeks to serve people of all
faiths and no faith at all,
and if it engages in education,
social services, and charity –
then, according to the HHS rule, it
is not “religious enough” to be exempt
from having to provide surgical
procedures & pharmaceuticals judged to be immoral. And this came after the Hosanna-Tabor case
in which the U.S. Department of
Justice tried to argue
that a church had no more rights in
hiring its ministers
than a labor union or a social club
have in hiring their employees –
a view that the Supreme Court
unanimously rejected.
C. The point is that the Administration is drawing lines
where we, the sponsors of religious
works don’t draw lines ourselves.
The government’s attempt to tell the
Church which of our institutions
seem religious to the state is
profoundly offensive
and entangles the government in the
internal life of religious institutions.
Unless we stop it now, this attempt
to narrow the role of religion in our culture
will spread like a virus through our
nation’s laws and policies.
It this attempt by the government
goes unchecked, the future will look like this:
either we stay in the pews or else
violate our consciences…
not a good menu from which to choose.
D. The Catholic Church, joined by ecumenical and interfaith partners, has resisted
through direct talks with the
Administration, by seeking legislative remedies,
by filing suits in federal court in
various districts, and by passing state laws
like the one here in Missouri—
and here I’d like to pause here to
congratulate the Missouri state legislature,
the Bishops of Missouri, the Missouri
Catholic Conference & the many parishioners whose work and witness led to
the override
of Governor Nixon’s veto of Senate
Bill 749, the religious liberty bill.
You have given hope to the rest of
the nation
by standing together—Church and
Government—
for the rights given by God and
protected by our Founding Fathers
and guaranteed by the U.S.
Constitution.
This law would ensure that no one is
forced to violate their religious beliefs
by having to pay for the destruction
of unborn life.
Be assured of my prayers that the
current court challenge
will result in a victory for
religious freedom, for life, and for our Constitution!
E. Yes, we’ve resisted the H.H.S. mandate, this attempt by the government
to marginalize faith and define
religion, in various ways:
by engaging in the Year of Faith focused on the new
evangelization;
by a Marian prayer campaign,
including a Mass and Pilgrimage for
Life and Liberty in the Nation’s Capital
at the Basilica of the National
Shrine of Immaculate Conception on October 14;
by launching a texting campaign (text
Freedom to 377-377),
as well as by scholarly conferences,
by other forms of advocacy, and much more… …including here in Missouri
where people like Mary Beth Rolwes of
St. Clement of Rome Parish in Des Peres helped produce signs promoting
religious liberty
and where a Rosary crusade is using
the power of prayer
to confront these grave incursions on
our religious freedom.
F. But the H.H.S. mandate struggle goes on.
None of the so-called accommodations
offered by the Administration help;
none of them were devised with direct
input from the bishops.
This struggle has been portrayed in
the media as a struggle about contraception.
We know it is not. It is a struggle
to preserve a fundamental 1st Amendment freedom,
viz., the exercise of religion free
of governmental interference.
What underlines this fact is that
most of our ecumenical partners
don’t share our teaching on
contraception –
but they recognize that the Federal
Government has decided
to breach the wall of separation, to
come into the Church’s territory
to force the Church’s hand regarding
its teaching on faith and morals,
to compel its institutions to behave
like secular institutions,
not faith-based institutions.
Once the State can force the Church’s
hand on these issues,
the door is open for the State to
force the Church’s hand on almost anything else—and not just our Church, but
all churches.
G. What is true in the State of Maryland is true here in Missouri—
that the Catholic Church is the
largest provider
of social and charitable services to
the poorest of the poor.
We are the largest private educator
and we struggle largely at our own expense
to educate some of the most
disadvantaged children …
often lifting them up out of poverty
and transforming their lives.
We want to continue doing this but in
fidelity to the faith
that inspired us to undertake these
services in the first place.
This is the kind of
country the United States was meant to be.
H. We also believe that private employers who want to follow their
consciences
should be allowed to do so – and
until now they were –
This includes an air conditioning
company in Colorado run by a Catholic family
that recently won injunctive relief
from a Federal judge
from having to conform to the HHS
mandate.
It includes organizations that are
not Church owned but serve the Church’s mission,
such as Our Sunday Visitor and the
Knights of Columbus.
Churches are responsible employers;
so are conscientious employers such
as those I’ve mentioned.
They provide good jobs and good
benefits – they are not part of the problem
but rather they are part of the
solution!
No one is forced to work for an
institution based on Christian principles
and besides all this, the government
has exempted many groups
from providing these services by
“grandfathering them” –
but it has not yet budged with regard
to the objections of the Catholic Church,
other churches, and private employers
with conscientious objections to the HHS rule.
I. The Virginia Act for Establishing Religious Freedom,
drafted by Thomas Jefferson and
enacted in 1786, proclaims it tyrannical
for the government to force an
individual to contribute money
“to the propagation of opinions in
which he disbelieves” –
but that is the net effect of the HHS
mandate on private employers,
on church-related employers, and on
churches themselves.
It is up to us to make sure that such
tyranny does not become the law of the land.
Sadly, this was not the posture of a federal court judge
who recently dismissed the lawsuit
filed by Mr. Frank O’Brien,
owner of a small mining company in
St. Louis.
Mr. O’Brien sued over the HHS
mandate, which took effect this summer
and which forced him to violate his
religious beliefs
by providing health insurance
coverage
of abortion drugs, sterilizations and
contraception.
Shockingly, the judge determined that
Mr. O’Brien would not be violating
his religious convictions by providing the coverage. The judge in the case referred to the subsidy
of abortion drugs and contraceptives
by a religiously conscientious
employer as a “slight burden on religious exercise”
yet condemned the plaintiff’s
reliance on the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, saying the 1993 statute “is
not a means to force one’s religious practices upon others.”
J. While much, indeed, is being done to turn back the HHS mandate—
and we will continue to exercise
every reasonable avenue to undo this onerous law---even if the mandate were
upended,
the struggle to preserve religious
liberty would not be finished.
Major Catholic international relief
agencies still face discrimination
in competing for contracts because
they refuse to violate Catholic teaching.
Catholic Charities in various parts
of the country are still forced
to close down their adoption services
because they will not place children
with same-sex couples and individuals,
and a recent Vermont inn-keeper was
forced to pay $30,000 to settle a lawsuit
filed by a lesbian couple who wanted
to hold their wedding reception at the inn.
The owners of the inn believe
marriage is reserved for one man and one woman
and have been forced to turn away all
wedding receptions.
In secular universities and colleges,
religious groups are being
de-legitimized and pushed off campus.
And all of us are familiar with
relentless attempts
to remove all references to religion
on public lands.
Instead of being a land that is
tolerant of religious faith,
we are becoming quite intolerant.
V.
Conclusion
A. At the end of the day, we will be judged by our fidelity to our
responsibilities
and how we sustain that fidelity.
Our responsibilities call us to rally
for religious freedom
in the context of the national common
good
and as a beacon of hope for people
suffering religious persecution
in various parts of the world.
We are called to engage our fellow
citizens and government leaders robustly
but do so in civility, respect, and
love.
This is the pattern given us by the
saints.
This is the pattern give us by our
early Christian brothers and sisters,
so eloquently evoked by your own
Archbishop Carlson
from this very Capitol Building
earlier this year.
“How did the early Church survive and
thrive in a hostile culture…
how did it come to pass that the
Church is still living reality,
but the Roman Empire lives in history
books,” he asked.
“It was the witness of believers.”
This is our path now, as we sustain
our national promise
of freedom and equality for
succeeding generations.
B. Thank you for your attention, your support, and your prayers.
I pray this day will be faith-filled,
inspiring, and affirming
and I have been pleased to be a small
part of it.
I urge you to vote in the critical
election next month and to keep alive
the civil, necessary public debate
surrounding issues of importance,
including those of religious liberty,
in the days and weeks leading up to November 6.
And I urge you to continue taking the
faith that inspires you to worship on Sunday,
out into the public square the other
six days of the week.
That truly is living your faith,
something we are each called to do
by our Baptism and our discipleship.
God bless our Church, God bless the
great State of Missouri,
and God bless these United States of
America!
