Catholics are not winning any popularity contests. Not only do we still face fallout from the abuse crisis, we also now regularly hear accusations of “hate” for our stances on life and sexual morality. We certainly have a long fight ahead of us to preserve religious freedom. As one freedom among many, it seems that our arguments for why we need to be able to express our own beliefs within our own communities are becoming harder for outsiders to understand.
Simply standing on the ground of freedom may entail a losing battle. We need a more compelling articulation of our message, embodied in a joyfully countercultural witness.
The Equality Act, which passed the House in both 2019 and 2021, although not the Senate, would extend the Civil Liberties Act to include the categories of sex and gender. It follows a long line of Supreme Court decisions which created a right to contraception, abortion and homosexual marriage based on a “right to privacy,” which cannot be found explicitly in the Constitution. Nonetheless, the Supreme Court seems to have enshrined the nation’s belief in the absolute supremacy of freedom, described in majority opinion of Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992), as the “right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.”
On the other hand, recent rulings, such as Hosanna-Tabor (2012) and Guadalupe (2020) put forward the doctrine of “church autonomy” and a “ministerial exemption” that would allow religious organizations to operate according to their beliefs, including in their hiring and firing, even when in conflict with the rights established in the name of privacy.
Based on the latter rulings, Catholics may still have a chance of winning court cases. Is that enough, however, to preserve religious freedom in the long term? Helen Alvaré’s recent reflection, Religious Freedom after the Sexual Revolution: A Catholic Guide (CUA Press, 2022), offers an astute and elegant primer on how to navigate our next steps. More than a legal fight, she recommends getting our house in order and learning how to more effectively communicate what we believe and why we believe it. We are certainly losing badly on this level.
Even when we defend ourselves, we tend to use arguments that fail to convince, claiming that we are simply following rules that are imposed on us from above (from the bishop or the Vatican). This train of thought does not stop anyone from pointing the finger at us, countering that we are unloving, are targeting others, and that our own people do not follow these rules, anyway.
Rather than acting like we are defeated already, Alvaré points to the need for institutional revival. Catholic communities “should stop implying that ‘the bishop made me do it.’ Instead, they should communicate first a thicker and more integrated religious description of a Catholic institutions as a community of ‘all-in’ service to Christ” (69). Our institutions carry a mission on behalf of Christ to manifest in words and actions the loving presence of Christ. Love is not a feeling; it does not arise from acting on our desires. Rather, it stems from a selfless gift of oneself to another, and the witness of our institutions should embody this genuine love.
This requires, of course, hiring for mission and ensuring that all those who work in Catholic schools, hospitals and charitable organizations are willing to live and represent the faith and to communicate it to others.
Secondly, Alvaré encourages us to be clear and confident in how we communicate. Rather than being falsely pigeonholed as a people against love, we can offer an articulation of why we stand for life and the centrality of the family. Our positions are well-founded and even backed up empirically. Take contraception as an example (181-89). Often the rhetoric used against us is self-defeating, if someone cared enough to look. Contraception has created more unwanted pregnancies, less marital happiness and stability, and women are more exploited, not less. Clear communication flows from a stronger Christian community: both need to be strongly Christ-centered.
Our individualist and materialist culture views Christian ethics as restricting of freedom and, therefore, of one’s happiness. Jesus points us to the true happiness that flows from sacrifice: giving oneself in love. Catholics view the body as a sacred gift entrusted to us by God, meant to serve as his temple and a means of sacrificially loving others. Christian ethics calls us to something higher: sacrificing a fleeting happiness in order to participate in the life of God.
Conviction points the way forward — not simply digging in our heals but embracing the truth that God has given us to live and share. We are accused of hate, even though we oppose things that have been found to be harmful to both bodily and spiritual integrity. We have the true message of love and cannot succumb to embarrassment before its truth. Instead of hiding it or running from it, we can provide a transformative path of healing for our society, helping it to recover a deeper freedom.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
Most of the Church’s world history has been one of most people being poor, not the wealth we have today. Secular raised people can’t understand why we need our Faith, they look to the government and common acceptance for guidance and sustenance.
Yea good point, I guess the church is obsolete now isn’t it? You accidentally pointed out an interesting fact which is that there is a high correlation between religion and poverty. That is because just a mere promise of a better existence someday is better than nothing even if that promise makes no logically coherent sense whatsoever, I guess.
Why on earth would anyone believe they’re going to receive a payment in exchange for suffering? This is the greatest scam of all time.
What is “obsolete” is that there is no God. Of course it has been a constant theme, prevails today, as it will in the future. A friend of God will receive the promised reward, an enemy of God will await the fires of hell. God is very forthright and a man of common sense will value his eternal soul and make peace with God. Your supervisor may promise you a bonus for work well done! The promises of God are more sure.
Pride and folly co mingled, distance a man from reality. Our saviour, Jesus Christ waits to welcome you.
Isaiah 61:1 The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me, because the Lord has anointed me to bring good news to the poor; he has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to those who are bound;
Luke 6:20 And he lifted up his eyes on his disciples, and said: “Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God.
Matthew 26:11 For you always have the poor with you, but you will not always have me.
Mark 14:7 For you always have the poor with you, and whenever you want, you can do good for them. But you will not always have me.
Romans 8:18 For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us.
James 5:10 As an example of suffering and patience, brothers, take the prophets who spoke in the name of the Lord.
James 1:12 Blessed is the man who remains steadfast under trial, for when he has stood the test he will receive the crown of life, which God has promised to those who love him.
My prayers are with you.
You can’t scare me into believing you if the threat isn’t credible in the first place. Perhaps this was the trap you fell into.
Dear Andrew:
Whether a man comes to God through love or fear, the important thing is that he arrives. Yet, God challenges us by stating that He chooses us, rather than we choosing Him. Are you stating that God has not chosen you then? What a dilemma for you, a man without hope! Will you say God is unjust or He made the right decision because you want nothing to do with Him?
Ephesians 1:4 Even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love
John 15:16 You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide, so that whatever you ask the Father in my name, he may give it to you.
John 6:44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.
Ephesians 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God,
2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.
Do you find a way out of this conundrum? Do you have equanimity or unease in the pit of your stomach?
The question is rhetorical, yet it is one the atheist does ponder! However, there is hope:
John 6:37All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out.
Matthew 11:28 Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
John 6:39 And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day.
Remember the thief on the cross! He repented and asked Jesus to forgive him. Jesus reaches out the hand of friendship to you as well. Be wise and accept it.
In Christ’s name,
Brian
sorry, typos, trying again:
No, I have no equanimity whatsoever. I did have an enormous amount of equanimity while I was being raised Catholic though, which is why I threw the ideology into the trash can once I started using my brain. Even the concept of “sin” itself makes no sense. If God designed us with “free will” and the ability to do evil, he would have no place being offended by his design working exactly as designed. Invisible but wants to be your buddy makes no sense. I’m mad you ate my fruit but now that you murdered my son I forgive you for eating my fruit makes no sense. Literally nothing you have to say makes sense except perhaps love your neighbor but then again a broken clock is right twice a day.
replace “equanimity” with “anxiety” in my comment, then it works. thanks for teaching me a new word that nobody actually uses though. =)
“Whether a man comes to God through love or fear, the important thing is that he arrives”
BTW, I firmly reject this thinking because I believe that a relationship based on fear is intrinsically toxic, without exception.
Short version – enlightenment thinkers introduced a new form of freedom that departed from ancient tradition in that it emphasized individual choice. So, how is that working out for us? Are we more happy, more enlightened? No; depression is up and predicted to continue to increase in the future.
Long version – Christian teachings from St Augustine and particularly St. Thomas Aquinas refer to Aristotle and natural law as the basis for happiness and human flourishing. It was not until a couple hundred years ago that philosophers designated human choice as a basis for freedom. Led by Ockham, the traditional harmony between humanity and nature was separated and replaced by his freedom that claimed to be indifferent to nature.
By contrast, the Christian perspective views freedom as an attraction toward the good, given by God and experienced in our natural inclinations to act one way or another. And this religious approach anticipates a gradual realization of freedom, with progressive levels of learning. Beginning with the Ten Commandments, guidelines are learned, similar to the way a piano student learns the fingers should do certain things to produce the desired effect. Ultimately, we progress as Christians to a level of freedom, beyond discipline, that delivers enlightenment and happiness by acting in concert with the beatitudes as taught by Jesus Christ in the Sermon on the Mount. “The Sources of Christian Ethics”, Servais Pinckaers, OP.
This religious outlook is referred to as “Freedom for Excellence” and is in opposition to Ockham’s “Freedom of Indifference”. The Freedom of Indifference approach puts humanity in a central position and would argue for suicide, abortion, etc., as a means of relief of suffering while the Freedom for Excellence approach argues against things that oppose our natural inclination, given by God, which is to preserve life and thereby experience fulfillment.
So maybe this is an interesting way to consider freedom: how is freedom defined, what is the utility of freedom with regards to the individual and to society, how are freedom and happiness related, etc.?
As for religious freedom, again many are often unaware of a very important distinction:
This is religious freedom: you can believe in whatever you want
This is not religious freedom: you can’t do that because my religion says it’s not ok
So no, your religious freedom is not under attack and it never was. You simply don’t understand what religious freedom actually entails, in particular its limitation when it comes to subjugating others, specifically, you are limited to at most zero of that. Not only is your religious freedom not under attack, you specifically have privileges that others do not such as churches not having to pay taxes. What the heck is up with that btw? Definitely worth revisiting. But anyway.
Another straw man argument.
The so called “equality” act was created by Baptized Catholics who no longer affirm the Sanctity of the marital act within The Sacrament Of Holy Matrimony and The Sanctity Of The Life Of Every Beloved Son Or Daughter From Conception To Natural Death.
How can one even begin to get one’s house in order if one is not able to discriminate between acts that affirm that God, The Most Holy And Undivided Blessed Trinity, Through The Unity Of The Holy Ghost Is The Author Of Love, Of Life, And Of Marriage, and acts that deny that God, The Most Holy And Undivided Blessed Trinity, Through The Unity Of The Holy Ghost, Is The Author Of Love, Of Life, And Of Marriage?
“For the Holy Spirit was not promised to the successors of Peter that by His revelation they might make known new doctrine, but that by His assistance they might inviolably keep and faithfully expound the Revelation, the Deposit of Faith, delivered through the Apostles. ”
Canon 750
1. Those things are to be believed by divine and catholic faith which are contained in the word of God as it has been written or handed down by tradition, that is, in the single deposit of faith entrusted to the Church, and which are at the same time proposed as divinely revealed either by the solemn Magisterium of the Church, or by its ordinary and universal Magisterium, which in fact is manifested by the common adherence of Christ’s faithful under the guidance of the sacred Magisterium. All are therefore bound to avoid any contrary doctrines.
2. Furthermore, each and everything set forth definitively by the Magisterium of the Church regarding teaching on faith and morals must be firmly accepted and held; namely those things required for the holy keeping and faithful exposition of the deposit of faith; therefore, anyone who rejects propositions which are to be held definitively sets himself against the teaching of the Catholic Church.[new]
I agree entirely. In fact when I saw the heading of this article I misread it. Catholics are not winning popularity contests for very good reasons. Biden Pelosi Fauci Newsom AOC the list could go on. We also have a hierarchy who acted as instruments of the state. They closed churches and allowed the sick to die without the last rites. We have a Pope who uses dramatic language about hitmen concerning abortion and who proceeds to advance pro abortion colleagues onto pro life committees. No, very little to commend many Catholics in public life. Thank God for CWR and a few other stalwarts of faithful love of Christ.
No doubt the erroneous notion that private morality and public morality can serve in opposition to one another and are not complementary, has led to grievous errors in both Faith and Morals to the point that there now exists bishop v. Bishop, cardinal v.Cardinal, and pope v.Pope.
“If there is a union of a private nature, there is neither a third party, nor is society affected. Now, if the union is given the category of marriage, there could be children affected. Every person needs a male father and a female mother that can help shape their identity.”- Jorge Bergoglio, denying The Sanctity of the marital act within The Sacrament of Holy Matrimony, and the fact that God, The Most Holy And Undivided Blessed Trinity, Through The Unity Of The Holy Ghost (Filioque), Is The Author Of Love, Of Life, And Of Marriage, while denying sin done in private is sin. To deny The Unity Of The Holy Ghost, is to deny The Divinity Of The Most Holy And Undivided Blessed Trinity, Father, Son, And Holy Ghost, which is Apostasy.
Sin is sin, whether done in private or in public.
From The Catechism Of The Catholic Church:
II. THE DEFINITION OF SIN
“1849 Sin is an offense against reason, truth, and right conscience; it is failure in genuine love for God and neighbor caused by a perverse attachment to certain goods. It wounds the nature of man and injures human solidarity. It has been defined as “an utterance, a deed, or a desire contrary to the eternal law.”121
1850 Sin is an offense against God: “Against you, you alone, have I sinned, and done that which is evil in your sight.”122 Sin sets itself against God’s love for us and turns our hearts away from it. Like the first sin, it is disobedience, a revolt against God through the will to become “like gods,”123 knowing and determining good and evil. Sin is thus “love of oneself even to contempt of God.”124 In this proud self- exaltation, sin is diametrically opposed to the obedience of Jesus, which achieves our salvation.125
1851 It is precisely in the Passion, when the mercy of Christ is about to vanquish it, that sin most clearly manifests its violence and its many forms: unbelief, murderous hatred, shunning and mockery by the leaders and the people, Pilate’s cowardice and the cruelty of the soldiers, Judas’ betrayal – so bitter to Jesus, Peter’s denial and the disciples’ flight. However, at the very hour of darkness, the hour of the prince of this world,126 the sacrifice of Christ secretly becomes the source from which the forgiveness of our sins will pour forth inexhaustibly.”
It is a sin to accomodate an occasion of sin, and thus cooperate with evils.”
Helen Alvarés’ Catholic institutional freedom focused on love of Christ, that charitable presence in the community is exemplary. Although those institutions vary in scope and purpose, for example Catholic Relief Services [CRS] among them. They are driven by a concept of the common good that doesn’t always complete Saint Thomas Aquinas’ initial premise, “that the common good is not opposed to the good of the individual, but instead is the most fulfilling good that he can participate in” (in Ziegler What is Social Justice).
We can begin with NCRep Michael Winters’ take, that true libertarianism focuses on the common good. For Winters the common good understood as universal in application notwithstanding private or institutional preferences. Examples, Catholic insistence on religious freedom regarding opposition to abortion, contraceptive government mandates. Whereas authentic application of the common good respects ‘the good of the individual’ including institutions. On the other hand we have Catholic institutions [CRS] cooperating with agencies that promote abortifacients, contraceptives, abortion [likely the legacy of Saul Alinsky per Card Bernadin within the Catholic Church].
Furthermore, Aquinas’ premise, ‘what is the most fulfilling good that he [the individual] can participate in’ is [at least has been] misunderstood evident when CRS et al provide goods to the extent and duration, as in Haiti that actually is proven unproductive for the good of the individual. In effect, removing the incentive to be self sufficient and recover their economy, creating a perpetual dependency on the ‘compassionate’ handout. This has been the legacy in minority urban communities and with our Native Americans.
Jared Staudt’s correct isolation of the Equality Act, created by Baptized Catholics, is a prime example. Catholics converted from Catholic practice to the socialist Alinsky, Michael Winters concept of the common good.
And why do you suppose you aren’t winning any popularity contests? It’s because you claim to be offering “good news” when in fact it’s the exact opposite. Good news: you live in North Korea 2.0 which implements and prosecutes “thought crime”. Good news: you need to apologize for being born. Good news: we have institutionalized apologizing the supreme leader (aka confession) on a regular basis, so you can live your life in a constant state of anxiety. Should I go on? There’s a lot more BAD news you are offering us.
Cardinal Zen outlines important distinctions here, I think. There are different convictions and we have to understand them.
‘ Zen told reporters after the verdict on Nov. 25: “Although I’m a religious figure, I hope this (case) won’t be associated with our freedom of religion. It’s not related.” ‘
https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/252914/hong-kong-court-convicts-cardinal-zen-and-five-other-democracy-advocates
Andrew Williams, November 24, 2022 at 2:37 pm, the Roman Catholic faith doesn’t make you rancid; your remonstrations put on display how you are decomposing inside yourself.
Jesus Christ is in the RC faith real and entire and He can heal you of your insipidity and its causes and processes. It’s a lot and yes too much for anyone; but He is Almighty. As the Protestants like to say, He is Worthy.
None of us is worthy. Punchline: You’re not worthy. Why would I listen to you.
‘ That is because just a mere promise of a better existence someday is better than nothing even if that promise makes no logically coherent sense whatsoever, I guess.
Why on earth would anyone believe they’re going to receive a payment in exchange for suffering? ‘
Yea, I am decomposing because I’m unable to tell the difference between having an invisible, undetectable friend and having no friend at all. If those two things seem identical to me, that’s because I’m rancid and I “just don’t get it”. Looks like you won the day, but it was only possible due to the amazing ability of the supernatural hypothesis to self-validate in circular fashion.
1. make a claim
2. mention something about God/Jesus while speaking matter-of-factly about this and that
3. option to cite a few bible verses for good measure
4. because God/Jesus, claim in step 1 is proven true
Your statements are a variant of the “you have a hardened heart” fallacy used to explain away reasonable skepticism. In other words, my inability to access the “sixth sense” (let’s call it the spirit or prayer protocol) is because I am heartless, despite the apparent asymmetry with respect to my other five senses which had no such learning curve; they just worked out of the box. But this hardened heart nonsense is a fallacy because we haven’t even gotten to the point where my love or lack thereof would come into play or not… love of WHAT? What and where is this thing?
“Invisible but wants to be your buddy” is axiomatic absurdity and you know it. If your spouse was undetectable all the time, would that be a healthy relationship? What would their invisibility suggest around whether they love you or not? It’s not a trick question and I’ll also give you the answer even though it’s obvious: scarce means not interested in you.
Dear Andrew:
How do we become acquainted with and come to know a person? We listen to them. When our Creator speaks it is of value to us.
Jude 1:22 And have mercy on those who doubt;
James 5:19-20 My brothers, if anyone among you wanders from the truth and someone brings him back, let him know that whoever brings back a sinner from his wandering will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins.
Galatians 6:1 Brothers, if anyone is caught in any transgression, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness. Keep watch on yourself, lest you too be tempted.
Fear is a gift that protects of from harm or death. It is well placed and needs to be heeded.
Your words suggest that people taught you according to their understanding rather than in keeping with what God says. Yes, we all make mistakes and we all need to e forgiven. There is an outpouring of concern for your spiritual wellbeing. We try as we can, yet the God who created all things, can best speak to the matters that have injured all of us. We need to listen to the right voice (the voice of truth) God’s voice.
Philippians 4:6-7 Do not be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God. And the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.
1 Peter 5:7 Casting all your anxieties on him, because he cares for you.
John 14:27 Peace I leave with you; my peace I give to you. Not as the world gives do I give to you. Let not your hearts be troubled, neither let them be afraid.
We see the solution that contains the vaccine, yet we don’t see the antibodies. We don’t see God the Father, nevertheless, He sent His Son that we might see, be touched by and listen to Him.
Colossians 1:16 For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him.
Romans 1:20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.
1 Timothy 1:17 To the King of ages, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honour and glory forever and ever. Amen.
God bless you,
Brian
“When our Creator speaks” lol
Do you happen to have a recording of that? I haven’t heard anything. What do you mean? It must be a metaphor, one which fallaciously attempts to explain something in nature via the supernatural, something which could be better explained by the natural or better deferred with a humble “I don’t know” until that point at which an answer may become apparent.
Andrew Williams you have admitted you are rancid and internally decomposing; and you are adamant that is absolute proof of something else for which you have no evidence even. The Word of God is powerful against you but still He is mighty to save you at His own pleasure.
By the way I said nothing about a sixth sense; and I didn’t quote Scripture I quoted Protestants.
Nor did I speak matter-of-factly. I stated the facts and you then owned them.
Dear Elias:
Earlier you wrote of God’s promises. An important consideration! We join our hearts in praying for Andrew. You and I are beneficiaries of God’s unmerited mercy and we want others to share in the gift too. Growing into spiritual maturity takes time an effort, God not only saves us, He changes us, conforming into His image. He uses us to the benefit and wellbeing of others!
Thanks, and God’s continued blessings,
Brian
2 Peter 1:4 By which he has granted to us his precious and very great promises, so that through them you may become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped from the corruption that is in the world because of sinful desire.
1 John 5:14 And this is the confidence that we have toward him, that if we ask anything according to his will he hears us.
Hebrews 11:6 And without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him.
2 Corinthians 1:20 For all the promises of God find their Yes in him. That is why it is through him that we utter our Amen to God for his glory.
Titus 1:2 In hope of eternal life, which God, who never lies, promised before the ages began
Colossians 1:27 To them God chose to make known how great among the Gentiles are the riches of the glory of this mystery, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory.
Romans 8:16 The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God,