The First Amendment to our Constitution guarantees that there will not be an established religion in the United States and that Congress will safeguard the free practice of religion in the country. The American colonists knew the problems that a civil society could suffer when one religion is given preference over others and is supported financially, politically and socially, even sometimes to the extent that other religions are curtailed or denigrated. Respect by the civil government for the religious convictions of its citizens has been a characteristic of American culture.
This is true even when some religious practices were deemed unusual by many or most of the American people. A few years ago, for example, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned an ordinance in Florida aimed at stopping the Santeria practice of sacrificing chickens in rituals. The Supreme Court also in another case, allowed the practice of smoking peyote, an illegal substance, in religious rituals of Native Americans. In such cases the religious freedom of the individual was protected. After all, the first right mentioned in the Constitution, even before the rights of speech, press and assembly, is that of religion.
But some ominous signs are appearing in the United States. In Boston recently the state government demanded that adoption agencies must place some of their children with homosexual couples, no exceptions allowed. The Catholic Church believes that children have the right to be placed in a home which has a father and mother, so that both parents may exert their influence upon their development. When the Catholic Church in Boston sought a “conscience clause,” it was refused. As a consequence one of the oldest adoption agencies in the country was closed down.
Recently too in the state of Colorado, a bill was introduced that would have compelled every charitable group receiving money from the state to follow “anti-discriminatory policies.” This would have meant in practice that Catholic agencies would have been compelled to hire non-Catholics, even those at odds with the church, for positions in church organizations. The bill was eventually tabled. But it lies in wait for a return to life.
Belmont Abbey College, a Benedictine institute of higher learning in North Carolina, paid little attention for a number of years about their Catholic identity. A new administration took over recently and declared its intention of strengthening its Catholic character.
In 2007, the administration offered an insurance plan that excluded paying for contraceptives, abortions, sterilizations and similar things considered contrary to Catholic moral life. Eight faculty members filed a complaint with the U.S. Equal Opportunities Commission, claiming gender discrimination. The local EEOC dismissed the suit but the national EEOC found the college guilty and ordered that the insurance plan be offered which provided the provisions of the previous plan. The college is fighting the decision; the outcome of the court case remains to be seen.
We might cite the difficulties of Catholic pharmacists, whose rights of conscience to refuse to give out abortifacients and contraceptives is recognized only by a half-dozen states. And we Catholics should be distressed when we see rejected an amendment to the current health care bill allowing for a conscience clause. We do not know yet what demands on our conscience a future government health plan might entail.
Government pressure upon Catholics to act against the teachings of the church is appearing on the American scene. The culture of our country has accepted certain behaviors as “rights” — in particular, abortion, contraceptive use and homosexual activity. The church considers these against the moral law, and as such not at all in the best interests of our country. Here lies the conflict. But the words of Scripture constitute our guide: It is better to obey God than man (much better)!
Father John A. Leies, SM, STD, is president emeritus of St. Mary’s University and was formerly head of the Theology Department there.