Religious Liberty Under Attack: Germany, Egypt, Missouri
For American Catholics, the summer of 2012 was partially thematized by the midsummer “Fortnight for Freedom.” The U.S. bishops’ document, “Our First, Most Cherished Liberty,” offered a list of besieged liberties currently “under attack, both at home and abroad.” The document clearly emphasized two endangered species of liberty in the U.S.: the widely debated federal mandate that requires insurance plans to offer contraception coverage; and state immigration laws, such as Arizona’s and Alabama’s, that outlaw charity and pastoral care toward people without proper documentation. On the first, lots of Commonweal coverage here. On the second, as of yesterday, federal judge Susan Bolton, though upholding the “show your papers” part of the laws, seems to have struck a victory for religious liberty in striking down the part of these laws which makes “harboring” or “transporting” undocumented immigrants illegal. The bishops of many border towns can breathe a bit easier today, in the hopes that they do not need to choose between caring for their flocks or following the law.
The thematized summer brought into focus some other tragedies of religious liberty under attack. The shooting at the Sikh temple was obviously the horrific example of an attack on religion, but other events may have slipped under the radar.
Charlotte Knobloch / Foto: Steffi Loos
For example, consider the example of Jews in Germany. After a court ruling that banned circumcision in Germany in June, and then a public beating of a rabbi and subsequent solidarity march (“yarmulke flash mob”), the liberty of Jews in Germany is seriously threatened. In response to the summer’s events, Jewish leader Charlotte Knobloch wrote an incisive editorial in yesterday’s Suddeutsche Zeitung: “Wollt ihr uns Juden noch?” In an English summary in Der Spiegel, her sentiment is translated thus:
For six decades I have had to justify myself because I stayed in Germany — as a remnant of a destroyed world, as a sheep among wolves. … I always readily carried this burden because I was firmly convinced that this country and these people deserved it. For the first time my basic convictions are starting to shake. For the first time I feel resignation. I seriously ask if this country still wants us.
Meanwhile in Egypt, the perilous position of Coptic Christians showed little signs of improvement over the summer. To wit, David Pinault at America notes that support for and anticipation of martyrdom has returned to consciousness in Egypt. A newspaper in Old Cairo recently featured the following headline:
“The blood of the martyrs cries out from the darkness, and the tears of the Copts will not dry. But our Lord is present.” A photo-montage accompanied the text—a crowd of wailing women at Maspero, horror and shock in their eyes; and the face of Jesus, his head bowed beneath a crown of thorns. Suddenly the distant days of Saints Catherine and Barbara felt very close at hand.
Finally, back in the heartland of the United States, I was stunned to find out that the proposed mosque in Joplin, Missouri, which had been subject to arson earlier in the summer, was burned again last month. One of the local leaders stood firm for American principles, despite having been subject to such hatred:
“This is what we stand for,” said Dr. Ahmed Asadullah, a member of the Islamic Society of Joplin. “Freedom of religion. Freedom of speech.”
Amid all the metaphorical attacks on religious liberty in the United States, I don’t want to forget the real ones: banning the sign of the covenant for Jewish men in Germany; violence and murder of Coptic Christians in Egypt; a repeated arson of a mosque under construction in Missouri.
Unless religious liberty means liberty for others, it means nothing. That’s the American vision, and since Vatican II, it’s the Catholic vision too. That’s why Mike Bloomberg’s 2010 speech (transcript) on Governors Island was so meaningful to me, as an American. An Irish-Catholic speechwriter penned an eloquent oration so that a Jewish mayor could defend the rights of Muslims to follow the First Amendment. It is that sweet land of liberty of which I, for one, sing.
You state: “Unless religious liberty means liberty for others, it means nothing. That’s the American vision, and since Vatican II, it’s the Catholic vision too.” (some have written that we really do not understand John Courtney Murray’s Religious Liberty Declaration and the demands this places upon the catholic church? http://www.americamagazine.org/content/article.cfm?article_id=3995 – key phrase – “Murray asserted that American democracy rested upon a religiously informed vision of the dignity of the human person and the role of the community in enhancing that dignity.”
And yet, some (including the USCCB religious liberty committee and its Fortnight for Freedom) appear to put their own religious liberty above that of others by interpreting decisions such as the HHS Mandate to be an *attack* on religious liberty. Does the USCCB enhance the dignity of the hospital/university/social agency employee by not allowing them to exercise their religious liberty and imposing their beliefs? Is the church injured by living in a society where they can express their beliefs but allow the individual to make their own decisions?
Granted, there is a tension between a church’s beliefs, policies, directives and society at large. But, the HHS Mandate provides for this complexity – churches, parishes, schools, dioceses are allowed a narrow denominational religious liberty protection (for employees, this means that you understand that you work for a religious group with definite policies and must conform to those beliefs, policies, etc.). But, organizations such as social outreach agencies, universities, and hospitals that receive significant federal/state dollars; whose missions are religiously inspired but are not identified or even managed in the same way as a catholic diocese or parish are asked to live and operate in a society that respects all employees religious liberty (e.g. access to healthcare including birth control). Does anyone really think that prospective employees of a catholic university, hospital, social agency expect that they must abide by the religious protocols of a specific religious denomination? What happens to hospitals that need trained, professinal, and specialty staffs? What happens to universities that need professional, research, and teaching experts?
It also touches upon the *big tent* and *common good* aspects of the typical Catholic social justice beliefs. Respecting religious liberty for all places constraints upon us – isn’t a compromise that we are able to live and witness our mission while at the same time having enough tolerance to respect the religious differences of those whom we might employ – HHS Mandate still leaves the decision up to the individual, doesn’t it?
Another area that we rarely hear is the question of unions and workers rights when the catholic church is the *employer* – how many US dioceses support and recognize unions within their workforces? If anything, the church appears to be hypcritical – the church preaches workers rights – unions, etc. except when it gets to the church institution itself.
So, agree that religious liberty is under attack – but is there really any comparison between the HHS Mandate and Egypt, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Israel (Gaza/West Bank), Germany, China, some African nations, etc. How much of this Fortnight for Freedom is manufactured outrage and a dog whistle that appears to misunderstand Vatican II’s Declaration on Religious Liberty?
Point of clarification: The Germany ruling did not “ban circumcision,” it concluded that “doctors in Germany who circumcise a boy for religious reasons could be accused of committing bodily injury, even in cases where parents have given their express consent.” Presumably, an adult male could decide to be circumcised, and if a child was circumcised with the consent of the parents, it is not clear who would bring charges against the doctor for committing bodily injury. I imagine only the child could do this once he became an adult, unless the state would do it on his behalf. I think this case, at least, does raise an important question regarding the bodily integrity of minors and the irreversible alterations to the bodies of children that can be made on behalf of their future, legally recognized selves. In an age of gene therapy, this is going to become an increasingly pressing ethical question.
Bill, thanks for your comments; I’m with you all the way.
The “manufactured outrage” about the HHS mandate: So true.
Our bishops keep shooting themselves in their collective feet. No wonder, no credibility.
“The bishops of many border towns can breathe a bit easier today, in the hopes that they do not need to choose between caring for their flocks or following the law.”
Independently of the religious freedom issue, I have a problem with laws that require citizens to police each other. As an employer, I am obligated to verify upon hire that my new employees can legally work here Why must I do that? I don’t care if they’re here legally or not;I file withholding taxes on all of them, the government can check this out on its own without dragging me on it.
What’s next, will I be obligated to report my neighbors if I think they might be stealing cable service? It sounds a little like the old East Germany where neighbors were expected to spy on each other.
[...] Religious Liberty Under Attack: Germany, Egypt … – Commonweal Go to this article [...]
Regarding the HHS mandate. No it’s not the same as the Christians in the mid east who are being murdered by Islamists to the tune of 200000 per year. But aligned with your request for truth, let’s just say it. Contraception and abortion are not healthcare. Free? Really? When mammograms, pap smears and prostate exams are…NOT free. Is not just a religious issue. It’s an insult to anyone with some semblance of intelligence. So was it political yes. It was a clear insult by the people who are putting politics above people. Those who wrote the healthcare bill. If healthcare was their core value. Then we wouldn’t be having this conversation.
Actually, Proteios1, mammograms, pap smears, and prostate exams ARE free under the Affordable Care Act. As are colonoscopy, cholesterol screening, flu shots, and a number of other preventive measures.