Religious freedom

As we hear in tonight’s reading from the prophet Ezekiel, we are responsible for the behavior of our neighbors.  If we see our neighbor doing something which is evil, we must tell him or her that this action is evil.  If we neglect to tell him, we assume some responsibility for his behavior.  However, we cannot judge the person who exhibits an evil behavior, because we don’t know their motive.  Only God can judge people.  The old adage applies:  hate the sin, love the sinner.

Today, our religious freedom is under attack from the U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services’ contraceptive mandate.  This mandate requires that virtually all organizations pay for contraceptives, sterilizations and abortion-inducing drugs in their health insurance.  The only exceptions are those religious organizations which employ and serve those of the same faith.  This mandate directly challenges our Church’s long standing opposition to contraception and abortion.  Many charities, hospitals, and universities will be forced to either violate their conscience or to likely close their doors if this mandate isn’t changed. 

This is an issue of religious freedom.  The question simply is: ”Does our government have a right to mandate a religious organization to take an action which is directly against its long established beliefs?  As a religious people, we have a responsibility to speak out and warn someone when they are doing something evil.  Also, as a religious people, we cannot participate in evil by paying for it or in some other way encouraging it.  For, if we do this, we clearly assume some responsibility for that evil.  

The contraceptive mandate reminds me of an issue which our nation faced during prior wars regarding young men who were drafted.  That issue involved the right of those who were morally opposed to the war; known as conscientious objectors, to refuse military service.  While it certainly was in the best interest of the country to have all young men available for the draft, our nation decided, in the interest of religious freedom, to allow those who were morally opposed to war to provide some service to the country which was not related to the war. 

While this may not be the best analogy, because providing free contraceptives certainly cannot be seen as important to our nation as winning a just war, it does illustrate that our nation has always realized the importance of following one’s conscience.  In fact, while I was in the Air Force during the Vietnam War, they emphasized to us that we must not follow an order which our conscience told us was not moral.  However, they were also quick to tell us that we must be willing to accept the consequences of not following that order. 

Recently, we celebrated the feast of St. John the Baptist.  John’s courage in upholding the truth about marriage, and his subsequent beheading as a result, challenges us in a time when it is not popular to speak the truth or live by the truth. Both he and St. Thomas More remind us that just because certain behavior is enshrined in the law of the land does not mean that is morally right. St. John the Baptist and St Thomas More, pray for our country, for our Church, and for each of us that we properly form and bravely follow our conscience.

God's love and our conscience

This reflection is based upon John chapter 21 verses 15 to 19.  In this Gospel reading, Jesus asks Peter three times if he loves him.  Each time Peter replies that he does.  Jesus might be asking this question three times to counteract Peter’s denying him three times.  Or it could be that Jesus is just emphasizing the point that Peter must love him.  Then, Jesus tells Peter a parable about old age.  He tells Peter that when he grows old someone else will dress him and will lead him where he doesn’t want to go.  This could be a reference to Peter’s eventual death on a cross.  Finally, Jesus tells Peter to follow him.  This sequence emphasizes Peter’s role in the Church.  As the head of the Church, as its rock, it is critical that Peter love Jesus and that he follow him. We see in Acts of the Apostles, that Peter does follow the footsteps of Jesus; that he works miracles and proclaims the message of Jesus.  Eventually, he dies on the cross as Jesus did.  It is said that Peter requested that he be crucified upside down because he wasn’t worthy to die the same type of death that Jesus did. 

Today, Jesus is telling us the same things that he told Peter.  He is constantly asking us if we love him and then telling us to feed his sheep.  Of course, our role isn’t nearly as important as Peter’s role was.  But, each of us is important in spreading the faith to those that we meet.  Imagine what our lives would be like if we didn’t have the gift of faith.  And for most of us, this wasn’t a conscious choice that we made but a free gift from our parents.  And we won’t have to suffer the death of a martyr in order to spread the faith to those we meet.  We just have to be a good example to others and to be able and willing to proclaim the faith when the opportunity presents itself.

The question, do you love Jesus, is an appropriate response from our conscience, after we sin.  And it is good for us to hear that question deep within ourselves.  When we hear this, it tells us that we aren’t so accustomed to sin that it doesn’t bother us.  Like Peter, we must quickly tell the Lord that we love him and, then, once again, follow him.

Paragraph 1783 of the Catechism tells us: “Conscience must be informed and moral judgment enlightened.  A well-formed conscience is upright and truthful.  If formulates its judgments according to reason, in conformity with the true good willed by the wisdom of the Creator.  The education of conscience is indispensable for human beings who are subjected to negative influences and tempted by sin to prefer their own judgment and to reject authoritative teaching.”

Pope Benedict recently said that Europe is doomed if conscience isn’t rediscovered when he said: 

“If, in keeping with the prevailing modern idea, conscience is reduced to the subjective field to which religion and morality have been banished, then the crisis of the West has no remedy and Europe is destined to collapse in on itself.  If, on the other hand, conscience is rediscovered as the place in which to listen to truth and good, the place of responsibility before God and before fellow human beings – in other words, the bulwark against all forms of tyranny – then there is hope for the future.”

Is there hope for the future here in Lebanon, Ohio?  Or have we also reduced conscience to a subjective thing?  The stakes are high.  The survival of society here is also dependent upon us, individually and as a society, listening to that voice within us which tells us to do good and to avoid evil.   Are we listening and are we following him or are we doing our own thing?