The pre-eminent social justice issue of our time, according to Pope Benedict XVI, is the free exercise of religion. He wasn’t just thinking of North Korea or Saudi Arabia but Europe and North America where religious belief, once considered a necessary element in the life of every society, is increasingly merely tolerated as the private choice of an eccentric minority, and in some quarters considered a social problem. There is a growing tendency of policy makers to inhibit the free exercise of religious belief.
To characterise religious freedom as no more than an individual entitlement or right that should be confined to the private sphere is to ignore the right of individuals to form a group, and to exercise their religious beliefs in the life of society. This exercise may take an educational, medical, legal or political form.
We need the Church to reminds us of the Transcendent, the mystery of God, the true source of our unique dignity as persons. In the self-contained world of secularism, rights are a gift of the state (positive law) or depend on the decisions of the voters (majoritism). So, upholding the liberty of the Church is the basic defence of the unique dignity of the individual, which is independent of the state, and on which all other rights and freedoms rest.
In the self-contained world of secularism, rights are a gift of the state (positive law) or depend on the decisions of the voters (majoritism). . .
In the American Bill of Rights, the Founding Fathers placed religious liberty at the top of the list of civil rights. It also is the basis for the separation of Church and State, and limits the competence of the state, something very necessary today (See the Hosanna Tabor case). Religious freedom entitles the Church to advance her social teaching in the political, legal, educational and medical fields.
An aggressive secularism sees religion, especially Catholicism, as an obstacle to social progress. They argue that religious liberty should be a gift of the state, not of the Creator. And so the state may limit the exercise of this right, if it is in conflict with other alleged rights. For example, the “right to abortion” requires that those holding pro-life views be strictly limited in expressing their beliefs to avoid discrimination against women. Government departments discriminate against Catholic institutions when they refuse to renew contracts because of this hostility, odium fidei.
Some have accused the American bishops of turning away from the main problems of society like poverty, but, as Archbishop Dolan pointed out, the first casualties of the erosion of religious liberty are Catholic hospitals, schools and social welfare agencies like adoption charities. One immediate example is the withdrawal of funding from Catholic agencies that provided care for trafficked victims. The government’s excuse is the Church’s opposition to providing “reproductive health”, a euphemism for abortion and contraception, which is now a requirement of the Department of Health and Human Services
Personal Update, Family & Life
See CI NEWS Article of Tue 21st Feb 2012