March 27, 2017

April 13, 2012

Bishops Stand for Religious Freedom, Left Howls

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Ad Hoc Committee for Religious Liberty put out a statement yesterday calling for a “fortnight for freedom” in the two weeks leading up to Independence Day. It is meant to call attention to the threats that the bishops see coming from an increasingly hostile state, one that is animated by rejection of many Christian ethical values, and which has been testing out ways that it can restrict religious liberty (for instance, by using the Soviet tactic of renaming freedom of religion “freedom of worship”).

It’s a lengthy statement that I would urge you to read in its entirety. But a couple of things jumped out at me. One is that it is not just a defense of Catholic freedom, but of the freedom of all Americans to believe and practice their faith as their conscience dictates. For instance, they offer examples of the kind of governmental overreach they are opposing, among which are:

*Christian students on campus: In its over-100-year history, the University of California Hastings College of Law has denied student organization status to only one group, the Christian Legal Society, because it required its leaders to be Christian and to abstain from sexual activity outside of marriage.

*Discrimination against small church congregations: New York City enacted a rule that barred the Bronx Household of Faith and sixty other churches from renting public schools on weekends for worship services even though non-religious groups could rent the same schools for scores of other uses. While this would not frequently affect Catholic parishes, which generally own their own buildings, it would be devastating to many smaller congregations. It is a simple case of discrimination against religious believers.

They also quote non-Catholics who stand with them:

A recent letter to President Obama from some 60 religious leaders, including Christians of many denominations and Jews, argued that “it is emphatically not only Catholics who deeply object to the requirement that health plans they purchase must provide coverage of contraceptives that include some that are abortifacients.” (Letter from Leith Anderson et al. to President Obama, December 21, 2011 (available at

More comprehensively, a theologically rich and politically prudent declaration from Evangelicals and Catholics Together made a powerful case for greater vigilance in defense of religious freedom, precisely as a united witness animated by the Gospel of Jesus Christ. (14 Evangelicals and Catholics Together, “In Defense of Religious Freedom,” First Things, March 2012.)

They also make clear that they are not adverse to working with others of good will to preserve religious freedom:

Both our civil year and liturgical year point us on various occasions to our heritage of freedom. This year, we propose a special “fortnight for freedom,” in which bishops in their own dioceses might arrange special events to highlight the importance of defending our first freedom. Our Catholic institutions also could be encouraged to do the same, especially in cooperation with other Christians, Jews, people of other faiths, and indeed, all who wish to defend our most cherished freedom.

In response, the Interfaith Alliance decided that it was the nineteenth century, and that playing the anti-Catholicism card was appropriate:

It is with great disappointment that I read the proclamation from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops on religious freedom. While I believe there are real threats to religious freedom in our nation today, it is becoming increasingly apparent that the Catholic Church’s definition of religious freedom is one that is only concerned with its own beliefs and practices and makes no room for those whose views differ. In the democratic society in which we live, we are fortunate our government makes accommodations when necessary to protect our beliefs and practices, but the Constitution still trumps scripture in every case. In fact, it is because of this understanding that religion – all religion – has been able to flourish in the United States.

The doctrine of the Catholic Church should be given no more weight in the creation of public policy than should the views of Jews, Muslims, Buddhists or any of the many other religions that can be found in this country. This includes the many Christian denominations that hold a different interpretation of the teachings of Jesus than the Catholic Church. [Emphasis added.]

What the author of this screed, the Rev. Welton Gaddy, means when he says “the Constitution” is the interpretation of the First Amendment that he and his buddies at the ACLU and Americans United put on it, one that neither requires nor even allows for any accommodation of religious faith or practice by the all-powerful, all-knowing, all-encompassing state.

Speaking of Americans United, the Rev. Barry Lynn banged his spoon on his high chair in response as well to the bishops as well:

The Catholic bishops’ new “religious liberty” campaign jeopardizes the rights of all Americans, according to Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

Well, it jeopardizes the right of the state to tell believers what they must do that violates their conscience.

The Rev. Barry W. Lynn, Americans United executive director, said, “The bishops’ campaign is thoroughly misguided. What they want is massive taxpayer funding of their ministries without complying with the fairness rules that everybody else observes. Maybe their two-week venture should be called a ‘Fortnight for Taxpayer Funding.’

“The bishops want to maintain their privileged status,” Lynn continued, “even if it means that other Americans’ freedoms are infringed. It is imperative that President Obama and Congress refuse to cave in to this outrageous assault on church-state separation.”

“When taxpayers are forced to support sectarian agencies that refuse to meet the needs of women, gay people and other communities,” concluded Lynn, “that’s a real violation of religious liberty. Public funds should go only to agencies that serve the public interest. If the bishops want to run sectarian social services, they ought to collect the money from their parishioners, not the taxpayers.”

So, what this amounts to is this: no organization that refuses to bow at the altar of Moloch and provide abortion on demand, or that refuses to bow at the altar of gay rights and put its stamp of approval on homosexual behavior, should be allowed to participate in any form of public service that involves tax money. In other words, no private organization that does not operate within the bounds of strict orthodoxy as defined by Barry Lynn and Welton Gaddy (not to mention NOW, NARAL, the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, People for the American Way, the Human Rights Campaign, and the United Church of Christ) should be allowed to offer its services to a needy public. What Lynn and his friends want is not church-state separation, but creation of a de facto establishment between the state and the Church of Ethical Liberalism.

Three cheers for the bishops. Please be praying for their message to get out, and for Americans of good will from across the religious and non-religious spectrum to join them in their fight to keep the First Amendment from being adulterated with liberal cultural orthodoxy.

Share this story:

Recent Related Posts



One shudders at what the word “freedom” means to these revolting cretins.

[1] Posted by Jeffersonian on 4-13-2012 at 01:12 PM · [top]

What a great statement by the bishops!

[2] Posted by Nellie on 4-13-2012 at 03:00 PM · [top]

Holy cow - what hypocrites!  The left wants taxpayers to pay for EVERYTHING - even to the point of creating a false firestorm around “access” to contraception (to the left - access = someone else pays for it, generally the taxpayer =  you and me).


[3] Posted by B. Hunter on 4-13-2012 at 03:02 PM · [top]

I didn’t realize that Catholic hospitals were payed for with tax money.  That’s interesting, as part of the 1st Amendment was to prohibit the use of taxpayer money to pay clergy.  Is this what is happening here?  I ask this as an actual question, I don’t know enough about this issue to make a complete statement.  I also don’t agree with the quoted statements in the article.

-John, posting on my mom’s account (and yes, she knows smile

[4] Posted by mufwumps on 4-13-2012 at 04:36 PM · [top]

Catholic hospitals are not “paid” with tax money. They, like other hospitals, are paid by Medicare for Medicare patients, just as they’re paid by other insurance companies. And since when do “clergy” perform operations, do MRI’s, and provide cancer care? Catholic hospitals have to support themselves basically. Many are in financial difficulty, just like many other hospitals. If Catholic hospitals closed, the government would find itself with a serious problem. Particularly in inner cities, Catholic hospitals provide care for the poor, for the elderly, for AIDS victims.

[5] Posted by Nellie on 4-13-2012 at 11:32 PM · [top]

Broken HTML tag alert - it’s in the first link titled Interfaith Alliance - a number of paragraphs are currently not showing up in Firefox 11 as a result.

[6] Posted by j.m.c. on 4-14-2012 at 04:25 AM · [top]

No one can lie like a liberal.  The Catholics object to being forced to pay for someone’s sexual behavior and they are accused of prohibiting that person from engaging in that behavior.

[7] Posted by Br. Michael on 4-14-2012 at 05:55 AM · [top]

j.m.c.: I’ve fixed the HTML tag, at least hopefully. Thanks for the heads-up.

[8] Posted by David Fischler on 4-14-2012 at 07:57 AM · [top]

I agree with Br. Michael.  The Catholic bishops have taken a public stand, and the liberals are screaming bloody murder about it.  Too bad, liberals!

[9] Posted by cennydd13 on 4-14-2012 at 09:56 AM · [top]

Ok, I think I understand better now.  Thanks Nellie!

[10] Posted by mufwumps on 4-14-2012 at 10:04 AM · [top]

You’re welcome! And hooray for your son for taking an interest!

[11] Posted by Nellie on 4-14-2012 at 10:38 AM · [top]

This lengthy statement is a really powerful explanation of religious liberty in the U.S.—our first freedom.

Folks might think about using this for a couple sessions of their home group or Bible study group.  Really good stuff.

[12] Posted by hanks on 4-14-2012 at 06:44 PM · [top]

It’s helpful in these discussions to remember that the issue is not merely “contraception”, but also abortion-inducing medications. The goal, of course is state-paid abortion, but one step at a time.

[13] Posted by Words Matter on 4-15-2012 at 03:05 PM · [top]

<a href=“”>HERE IS A VIDEO PLEA FOR CATHOLICS TO VOTE - and to vote Biblically.

Would that Anglicans and Methodists and Presbyterians and others were doing the same.

PS - I linked to Legal Insurrection intentionally rather than YouTube.  This is a conservative news and discussion blog run by a Conservative Jewish Law Professor at Cornell.  He’s tolerant and welcomes Christians and even Bible verses.

Another great Christian-run discussion blog is The Right Scoop.  They post Christ-honoring posts at Easter, Christmas, etc. and the discussion is conservative Christian oriented.

Hope you all are rejoicing in Christ’s sure victory over sin, death and even liberalism, schism, atheism, Marxism and Islam, and the plotting, perversion and perdition of mere men. 

“Be Still and Know I AM God” Psalm 46:10 ends with “I will be exalted (rise up and rule over) all creatures (movements, souls, living things) and I will be exalted (rise up, rule over) all the universe, all matter, physical reactions, energy, dynamics, planets, stars, suns.

(Psalm 2, Psalm 19:7-14, Psalm 139:19-24, Isaiah 31:8-9)

Blessings - GSS

[14] Posted by St. Nikao on 4-15-2012 at 05:55 PM · [top]

Sorry to have messed up that link.  Oh for an edit button!

[15] Posted by St. Nikao on 4-15-2012 at 05:57 PM · [top]

Registered members are welcome to leave comments. Log in here, or register here.

Comment Policy: We pride ourselves on having some of the most open, honest debate anywhere. However, we do have a few rules that we enforce strictly. They are: No over-the-top profanity, no racial or ethnic slurs, and no threats real or implied of physical violence. Please see this post for more explanation, and the posts here, here, and here for advice on becoming a valued commenter as opposed to an ex-commenter. Although we rarely do so, we reserve the right to remove or edit comments, as well as suspend users' accounts, solely at the discretion of site administrators. Since we try to err on the side of open debate, you may sometimes see comments which you believe strain the boundaries of our rules. Comments are the opinions of visitors, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Stand Firm site administrators or Gri5th Media, LLC.