Cuomo to Catholics: You’re Not Welcome in NY - by George J. Marlin

In TCT

I was born in New York State and have lived here for more than 61 years. During that time I have paid plenty in state and local taxes and have served the public in a number of capacities including two terms as Executive Director of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey.

I am also a Catholic and a member of New York’s Conservative Party, have served on the transition teams of governors-elect George Pataki (R) and Andrew Cuomo (D), and have been a member of Cuomo’s Council of Economic and Fiscal Advisors.

Yet despite my public service and the large chunk of my earnings that have gone to support New York’s governmental maze, according to Governor Cuomo, I should move out of the Empire State.

Why?  Because I am pro-life, oppose same-sex marriage, and have doubts about Cuomo’s 2013 hastily prepared gun legislation (the SAFE Act) that permits you to buy a gun with a 10-round magazine, but bans using more than seven shots if you need to defend yourself.      

Here’s what Cuomo said this past Friday on “The Capital Pressroom,” an Albany radio talk show, about a large segment of NY voters:

Who are they? Are they these extreme conservatives who are right to life, pro-assault weapons, anti-gay? Is that who they are?  Because if that’s who they are and they’re the extreme conservatives, they have no place in the state of New York because that’s not who New Yorkers are.

In an unguarded moment, Governor Cuomo stated publicly what many on the Left have been privately thinking for years: that pro-life and pro-traditional marriage supporters are Ku Klux Klan-like bigots who should either shut up or get out.

Cuomo has not only written off millions of New York Christians and Jews (among others) as unfit citizens, he has yanked the welcome mat from under half the nation’s population, who, public opinion polls indicate, oppose abortion and same-sex marriage.

As for those who “have no place in the state of New York,” the person at the top of that list must be the Archbishop of New York, Cardinal Timothy Dolan. That’s because Dolan has proudly followed in the footsteps of his predecessors who were unabashed defenders of Church teachings in the public square.

For instance, Cardinal Terence Cooke, NYC’s seventh archbishop (1968-1983), whose cause is being promoted for sainthood, publicly fought the passage of the state’s 1970 liberal abortion bill. And the week Roe v. Wade was handed down by the Supreme Court, he issued a pastoral letter that was read in every parish condemning abortion as a “fundamental moral evil.”  Cooke inaugurated the annual Respect Life week and established “Birth Right,” a service to help pregnant women who choose not to abort their babies.

As for “gay rights,” every year Cooke opposed proposed legislation in New York’s City Council that would have amended the administrative code to outlaw discrimination due to “sexual orientation or affectional preference.” You read that right.

A typical statement expressing the Church’s position, released by Cardinal Cooke in April 1978, reads:

If the bill has an underlying purpose, to advocate and gain approval of homosexual behavior and lifestyle, then there is no way in which the Catholic Church in the City of New York may find it acceptable. And there is no way in which we can remain silent on the issue.

The Catholic Church’s moral teaching differentiates between “orientation” and “behavior” for both homosexuals and heterosexuals. While a person’s orientation is not subject to moral evaluation, there is no doubt that a person’s behavior is subject to evaluation. Homosexual behavior and an attendant homosexual life style is not in accord with Catholic moral teaching and is, in fact, harmful to all persons who become involved; heterosexuality is the norm for human behavior.

And lest we forget, in the mid-1970s Cooke had an ally in his fight against abortion and gay rights: Mario Cuomo, father of the current governor.

The New York Times reported during Cuomo the Elder’s unsuccessful 1974 primary run for lieutenant governor that he said in a televised debate that “he would have voted against the 1970 law that relaxed abortion curbs in the state.”  The New York Daily News and the Post also reported that, in his unsuccessful 1977 run for mayor, Mario said he would veto a gay rights bill “that would give homosexual teachers the right to proselytize or advocate their lifestyle.”

I wonder if Governor Andrew Cuomo, a baptized Catholic and a graduate of Archbishop Molloy High School and Fordham University, will demand that Cooke’s cause for canonization be, well, aborted because the cardinal was an “extremist” for defending the teachings of his Church. Will ask his father, himself a former governor, to leave the state for having politically incorrect thoughts forty years ago?

By claiming that people who disagree with his cultural views “have no place in the state of New York,” Cuomo has joined those whom historian Richard Hofstadter described as “totalitarian liberals,” people who employ illiberal means to achieve so-called liberal reforms.

Cardinal Dolan and the bishops of New York’s other eight dioceses have an obligation to respond and to condemn anyone – especially any Catholic public figure – who threatens those who adhere to Church doctrine.

Chicago’s Cardinal Francis George has predicted that he will die in his bed, his successor will die in prison, and his successor will die a martyr. We may not be quite there yet. But unless Church leaders and others act quickly and forcefully, Catholics and others of traditional moral views may find themselves not simply marginalized, but – if some politicians have their way – facing something very like exile in their own nation.

«La Chiesa é l' ostacolo da abbattere» - di Massimo Introvigne

In NBQ

Il 16 gennaio 2014 la Pontificia Commissione Teologica Internazionale ha pubblicato un corposo documento «Dio Trinità, unità fra gli uomini. Il monoteismo cristiano contro la violenza» (aqui em HTML; aqui em PDF), presentato come frutto di cinque anni di lavoro e come testo specificamente approvato e rivisto dal Prefetto della Congregazione per la Dottrina della Fede, il prossimo cardinale Gerhard Müller. Temo di essere facile profeta se prevedo che questo documento, lungo e complesso, sarà letto da pochi, avrà scarsa eco sui media e finirà rapidamente nel dimenticatoio. Male: perché questo grande lavoro, voluto e richiesto da Benedetto XVI e ora completato sotto Papa Francesco, è di qualità veramente notevole e denuncia un'aggressione senza precedenti alla Chiesa che è in atto da parte della cultura laicista dominante, rispondendo colpo su colpo.

«La Chiesa è l'ostacolo da abbattere». Così il documento descrive l'attuale temperie culturale, dove agguerriti poteri forti danno il tono non solo alla cultura dominante nelle università, ma anche alla maggior parte dei media. Come si cerca di abbattere la Chiesa? Ascrivendole la responsabilità di tutte le violenze più gravi della storia. Queste, si afferma, derivano dalla fede nell'esistenza di verità assolute garantite da Dio creatore di una natura che la ragione può conoscere e decifrare come verità. Derivano, cioè, dal rifiuto cattolico del relativismo: e dal monoteismo, che rende fanatici e intolleranti.

C'è, anzitutto, un «disegno totalitario del pensiero unico», fondato su un «sentire relativistico totale»: è la dittatura del relativismo, che aggredisce chiunque pensi che esista la verità. Anzi, la verità «viene esplicitamente indicata come una minaccia radicale per l’autonomia del soggetto e per l’apertura della libertà. Soprattutto perché la pretesa di una verità obiettiva e universale, di riferimento per tutti, supposto che sia accessibile allo spirito umano, viene immediatamente associata ad una pretesa di possesso esclusivo da parte di un soggetto o gruppo umano. Essa porterebbe così alla giustificazione del dominio dell’uomo che ne rivendica il possesso sull’uomo che, secondo questa pretesa, ne è privo. In conseguenza di questa rappresentazione della verità, che la ritiene inseparabile dalla volontà di potenza, anche l’impegno per la sua ricerca, e la passione della sua testimonianza, sono viste a priori come matrici di conflitto e di violenza fra gli uomini».

Per la dittatura del relativismo, di questa violenza sarebbe responsabile la Chiesa perché insegna il monoteismo. Se c'è un solo Dio c'è anche una sola verità. Se invece ci sono più dei, allora sono possibili più verità. Solo il politeismo garantisce il relativismo. C'è una vera inversione rispetto alla tradizionale storia delle religioni, anche laica, che considerava il monoteismo un progresso rispetto al politeismo. Questo «rovesciamento del quadro moderno è inaspettato: ora il monoteismo è arcaico e dispotico, il politeismo è creativo e tollerante».

Per mettere in conto ai cristiani - che certo talora nella storia hanno ceduto alla tentazione della violenza, ma assai meno di altri, e certo meno delle ideologie anticristiane - anche massacri commessi da altre religioni, continua il documento, si ricorre a una categoria che la storia delle religioni ha invece da tempo messa in discussione, quella delle «tre grandi religioni monoteistiche», che esprime certo qualcosa di vero ma tratta l'ebraismo, l'islam e il cristianesimo. - che sono invece molto diversi fra loro - come se il loro «monoteismo» fosse identico. È un notevole merito del documento denunciare «la sommaria classificazione dell’ebraismo, del cristianesimo e dell’islam, come le tre grandi “religioni monoteistiche”», perché si tratta di tesi diffuse anche nel mondo cattolico. Lo scopo per cui il moderno laicismo ripropone queste vecchie teorie non è il dialogo interreligioso ma l'attacco alla religione, il cui scopo principale è attaccare il cristianesimo, anzi attaccare in particolare la Chiesa Cattolica. «Non possiamo passare sotto silenzio il fatto che, in qualche parte intellettualmente rilevante della nostra cultura occidentale, l’aggressività con la quale viene riproposto questo “teorema”, si concentra essenzialmente nella denuncia radicale del cristianesimo». «La puntigliosa identificazione del cristianesimo cattolico come l’ostacolo da abbattere, nella lotta contro il monoteismo che diffonde la violenza religiosa nel mondo, nonostante tutto, non cessa di stupire».

Il documento ribatte colpo su colpo a queste accuse. Interpreta alcune affermazioni bellicose dell'Antico Testamento, mostrando che s'inquadrano in uno specifico contesto storico, vanno lette anche come metafore della lotta contro il Diavolo e il male morale, e soprattutto sono state superate dal messaggio del Vangelo. In una parte di non agevole lettura del documento, ispirata al Magistero di Benedetto XVI, si fa anche notare che il cristianesimo ha permesso per la prima volta nella storia la distinzione - non la separazione - fra religione e politica, e ha fondato l’autonomia della politica, superando ogni tentazione teocratica.

Non è vero, si aggiunge, che il politeismo è tollerante: nel clima culturale creato dalle religioni politeistiche si sono consumate autentiche stragi contro i seguaci di religioni diverse. Associare politeismo e tolleranza appare persino «stravagante». La stessa «religione politeistica dell’impero romano, a sua volta, con tutta la straordinaria modernità del suo concetto di cittadinanza, e della sua struttura multi-etnica e multi-religiosa, perseguitò con specifico accanimento il cristianesimo, colpevole di rifiutare l’incensazione dell’imperatore come figura divina. La risposta si espresse nella testimonianza non violenta e nell’accettazione del martirio cristiano». Non parliamo, poi, delle ideologie moderne, portatrici di «un crescente e sconcertante dispiegamento di stili di vita e di comportamento ispirati alla violenza: spontanea, immediata, distruttiva. Sempre più inconsapevole di se stessa, e persino eticamente giustificata», o consacrata dalle leggi. Le ideologie, specie quelle distruttive del XX secolo, sono in realtà i nuovi politeismi, dove «l’uomo ostile al Dio buono e creatore, nell’ossessione di “diventare come Lui”, diventa un “Dio perverso” e prevaricatore nei confronti dei suoi simili. Dal politeismo di queste controfigure narcisistiche del “Dio perverso”, che viene dal peccato fin dall’origine, non può venire nulla di buono per la pacifica convivenza fra gli uomini».

Oggi l'aggressione contro la Chiesa Cattolica e i cristiani continua, fondata sul
«pregiudizio – tipico del modello razionalistico – secondo il quale, anche sul piano esistenziale e sociale, c’è un solo modo per affermare la verità: negare la libertà o eliminare l’antagonista». L'orizzonte è quello dell'eliminazione di Dio e dell'imposizione - ora suadente, ora violenta - dell’ateismo, con la conseguente negazione della libertà. «L’eliminazione di Dio, stabilita sulla base di una ragione "naturalistica", si associa oggi frequentemente alla risoluzione "biologica" della libertà umana. In questa prospettiva il nostro cervello si è costruito il pensiero di Dio per ragioni legate ad un determinato stadio evolutivo: in funzione del governo della complessità, per compensare l’inevitabilità della frustrazione, come dispositivo di neutralizzazione della morte».

La religione è dunque una patologia, che va eliminata. Il futuro che le ideologie preparano all'umanità è però un futuro di violenza e di morte. Già oggi viviamo - conclude il documento - nel «tempo della persecuzione», che «deve essere sostenuto, nell’attesa della conversione sperata per tutti. Di questa pazienza, di questa sopportazione, di questa tenacia dei “santi” nel portare la tribolazione dell’attesa, noi siamo in debito di riconoscenza verso molti fratelli e sorelle perseguitati per la loro appartenenza cristiana. Noi onoriamo la loro testimonianza come la risposta decisiva alla domanda sul senso della missione cristiana in favore di tutti. L’epoca di una nuova evidenza a riguardo del rapporto fra religione e violenza fra gli uomini è aperta dal loro coraggio. Dovremo sapercelo meritare. Dell’avvento di questa nuova epoca, e dei frutti dello Spirito che ne devono seguire, la Madre del Signore deve essere considerata l’insostituibile custode. La coscienza e l’invocazione della sua speciale intercessione, dovrà essere un tema speciale della nostra conversione e della nostra preghiera».

Intelijumento e impiedoso - por Nuno Serras Pereira

29. 08. 2013

Entre as formidáveis características da vasta maioria do povo português (para não dizer europeu) que se tem como católico, e tal se diz, há duas que se destacam sobremaneira: a boçalidade e a desumanidade. Estas propriedades espantosas são louvadas, encorajadas e mesmo abençoadas por amplos sectores da Hierarquia que parecem ver nelas instrumentos e sinais essenciais de comunhão, de unidade e de paz.

Muitos cuidam que desimitando a exemplaridade de Jesus Cristo, anunciando e afirmando tão só “coisas positivas”, descurando a denúncia e a oposição ao mal, ao erro e ao pecado sossegam os anticristos que por aí pululam ferozmente organizados, quando na verdade lhes abrem as portas à progressão, ao avantajamento, ao domínio implacável das consciências e de um criminoso poder totalitário. Outros descansam no dito de Jesus Cristo que se O perseguiram a Ele também nos perseguirão a nós. Asserção, de facto, infalível mas o que daí inferem é uma alarvice. De feito, concluem que nada lhes resta senão conformarem-se à perseguição entregando-se ao martírio; sem reflectirem que não são somente eles que estão em perigo mas também o bem das suas famílias, da sociedade, dos mais fracos e desfavorecidos, dos indefesos e dos inocentes, enfim o Bem-comum, pelo qual têm o dever estrito e grave de combater com todas as veras, prudência (não timoratamente, mas escolhendo os meios mais adequados fim que se propõem) e inteligência. Há ainda quem olhe para o presente com a mesma distância neutra e fria com que se consideram acontecimentos trágicos e nefastos de séculos passados, esquecendo que se nada podem fazer em relação ao que já sucedeu, têm a obrigação rigorosa de evitar que as mesmas catástrofes se repitam. Talvez se possa afirmar que os que assim pensam e procedem padecem de um embrutecimento comum: não aprenderem nada com o passado. De facto, temos aí todos os sinais e mais alguns que precederam os mais cruéis terrores e perseguições a que os povos e a Igreja foram submetidos – a revolução francesa, o socialismo, o comunismo, o fascismo (Mussolini), o nazismo -: o jacobinismo maçónico, a ideologia lgbt, a ideologia do género, a devastação da família fundada no matrimónio, a vigilância universal, a destruição da inocência das crianças nas escolas, a perversão das mentalidades pelas séries e telenovelas nas tevês, o eugenismo, o controlo demográfico, a matança sistemática, sem precedentes, dos inocentes, a experimentação descabelada, faustiana, nas pessoas na etapa inicial das suas vidas, a eutanásia, o efeminizar dos homens, o aniquilamento da maternidade e da nupcialidade, a fantasia de “parentalidades” canalhas, o rapto por parte do estado de crianças a seus pais, etc., etc. 

Os exemplos atrás que ilustram a cretinice e indiferença de tantos perante a malignidade que nos acomete e abocanha mostra outrossim o desprezo frio e cruel para com todas as vítimas, não só actuais mas futuras, das trevas que vertiginosamente se vão adensando. O carácter profundamente egoísta e inumano destas gentes revela-se com uma clarividência meridiana quando topamos com a reacção veemente e colérica da classe média e alta perante os cortes no bolso próprio, e o insensível marasmo displicente quando em relação aos pequeninos: os nascituros, as vítimas do divórcio, as crianças produzidas-congeladas-eliminadas-e-pouquíssimas-nascidas por processos técnico-laboratoriais, a co-adopção-adopção-plena por parelhas do mesmo sexo; e tudo o mais que já anteriormente foi referido.

O Senhor ensinou que quem procurar salvar a sua própria vida perdê-la-á mas quem a perder por Sua causa salvá-la-á. Também poderíamos parafrasear afirmando que quem procurar salvar a Igreja (espertezas saloias, diplomacias humanas, etc.) perdê-la-á (recordemos que historicamente ela já foi perdida em vários sítios do mundo, como lembrou o Papa Bento XVI) mas quem a perder (quem não recear a loucura da Cruz) por caus ade Jesus salvá-la-á. A Igreja é Cristo em nós. Nós somos o Corpo de Cristo. À honra e Glória do mesmo e de Sua e nossa Mãe a Imaculada Virgem Maria. Ámen.

Galli Della Loggia, historiador ex-comunista, denuncia la «revolución anticristiana» en Europa hoy

In RL  

“Una gran revolución se acerca en silencio a su fin en Europa. Una revolución de la mentalidad y de las costumbres colectivas que marca una gran ruptura con el pasado: la revolución anti-religiosa. Una revolución que golpea indiscriminadamente al hecho religioso en sí de cualquier confesión, pero que por razones históricas, y en concreto hablando de Europa, se presenta como una revolución esencialmente anticristiana”.

Así comienza un artículo escrito en la primera página de Il Corriere della Sera por Ernesto Galli della Loggia, intelectual laico italiano no conocido precisamente por sus posiciones conservadoras.

Por su interés y actualidad, ReL recoge en este reportaje las principales partes de este artículo de opinión.

Galli della Loggia es uno de los muchos intelectuales laicos italianos que se ha desvinculado del coro de acusaciones contra la Iglesia “oscurantista” que asola hoy en día el continente.

“Las iglesias cristianas no sólo han sido expulsadas progresivamente en casi todas partes de cualquier esfera pública mínimamente relevante, [...] sino que, a diferencia de las demás religiones, en la actualidad es legítimo dirigir las ofensas más graves y los insultos más sangrientos contra el cristianismo”, se lamenta.

El historiador y periodista hace un variado elenco de las diferentes ofensas que la religión cristiana está recibiendo en Europa:  

» En Irlanda, las iglesias están obligadas a alquilar sus propias salas de celebraciones, incluso para bodas entre homosexuales;

» en Roma, durante el concierto del 1 de Mayo, el cantante imitó el gesto de la consagración durante la Eucaristía pero con un preservativo entre sus manos en lugar de la hostia sagrada;

» en Dinamarca, el Parlamento ha aprobado una ley que exige a la Iglesia Evangélica Luterana  celebrar matrimonios entre personas del mismo sexo a pesar de que una tercera parte de sus ministros se hayan manifestado en contra;

» en Escocia dos obsétricas católicas fueron obligadas por un tribunal a participar en abortos realizado por sus compañeros; el colegio oficial de médicos británicos ha determinado que deben estar preparados para dejar de lado sus creencias personales con respecto a algunos aspectos controvertidos;

» en un vídeo reciente de David Bowie, aparece una escena en la que un sacerdote, después de golpear a un mendigo, entra en un burdel y seduce a una monja con estigmas en sus manos; en Inglaterra, se le ha prohibido a una enfermera llevar una cruz en el cuello durante horas de trabajo,

» una pequeña imprenta ha tenido que enfrentarse a acciones legales por negarse a imprimir material sexualmente explícito encargado por una revista gay; en Francia, de acuerdo con la legislación vigente, es prácticamente imposible para los cristianos manifestar públicamente que las relaciones sexuales entre personas del mismo sexo constituye un pecado según su religión”.

Y así sucesivamente en una avalancha de casos impresionantes que se pueden consultar en el sitio web intoleranceagainstchristians.eu.

Galli della Loggia es leído siempre con atención en El Vaticano, dicen. Su esposa es Lucetta Scaraffia, historiadora, y escribe a menudo en L´Osservatore Romano. Mantiene una estrecha amistad con su director, Giovanni Maria Vian.

Precisamente de este periódico, entre otros, ha extraído los numerosos ejemplos de discriminación comentados anteriormente. “Es más que suficiente para despertar el interés de cualquier conciencia liberal”, afirma Galli della Loggia.

“En este caso no se trata tanto de la Cristiandad, la Iglesia o la religión, sino de algo mucho más importante: se trata de la libertad. Y de la historia. De la conciencia de que libertad religiosa en Europa ha representado históricamente el origen (y condición) de todas las libertades civiles y políticas”, advierte el historiador.

“Ser absolutamente libre de adorar al propio Dios, de propagar la fe, de guardar los mandamientos, de adherirse a la visión del mundo y al sentido de la existencia que estos definen, de practicar públicamente el culto; pero también, por supuesto, de tener la libertad de no tener Dios ni religión: así se ha comenzado el camino de la libertad Europa. ¿Hay que recordar que ha sido el Dios cristiano?”.

Por último, el periodista e historiador concluye: “La libertad religiosa por un lado y la libertad de opinión y de expresión por otro –que son los dos pilares de la libertad política- van al unísono. Desde este punto de vista, es aún más preocupante el hecho de que hoy en día, en Europa, en muchos lugares y de muchas maneras, la libertad de los cristianos parezca objetivamente en peligro de extinción”.
Puede consultar el artículo completo en Il Corriere della Sera aquí.

Persecuzione - di Rino Cammilleri

 In Antidoti

Prepariamoci perché la persecuzione dei cristiani sarà (inizialmente) amministrativa, come quella contro i cattolici inglesi fino al 1828. Adesso in prima fila sono i ginecologi, gli infermieri e i medici che non prescrivono la pillola, più i farmacisti che non la vendono. Poi si passerà ai funzionari e impiegati che si rifiuteranno di celebrare o trascrivere “nozze gay”, nonché ai sessuologi che non assisteranno coppie omo con problemi. Gli affittacamere e i bread&breakfast hanno già i guai loro. I librai e gli edicolanti sono avvisati. Scrive Marco Respinti su La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana del 23 maggio 2013 che «a Portadown, in Irlanda del Nord, il tipografo Nick Williamson, cristiano, finirà in tribunale come “omofobo” per essersi rifiutato di stampare un giornaletto di propaganda omosessualista, per di più dalla grafica esplicita».

L’Osservatorio sull’intolleranza e la discriminazione contro i cristiani in Europa, diretto a Vienna da Gudrun Kugler, ha già faldoni pieni di roba del genere. Finiremo prima rovinati economicamente, poi in galera. Infine, se le carceri scoppieranno, gasati o terminati chimicamente (i nostri organi espiantati costituiranno ricco business). O nei campi di lavoro forzato. E non so cosa sia meglio. 

D’altra parte, il paganesimo non poteva tornare senza i suoi connotati più tipici: la schiavitù, il libero aborto e le persecuzioni contro i cristiani. 

Naturalmente, i più non reggeranno alla pressione e si adegueranno alle leggi, come nell’antica Roma. Solo pochi, come allora, accetteranno di perdere tutto per restare fedeli a Cristo. 

L’unica differenza con l’antica Roma è questa: la tecnologia a disposizione non lascerà scampo ad alcuno.

Columbus Bishop risks jail defending Catholic school that fired teacher for coming out as lesbian - by Kirsten Andersen

COLUMBUS, OH, May 3, 2013 (LifeSiteNews) – Columbus Bishop Frederick Campbell has weighed in publicly on the firing of a lesbian teacher from a diocesan high school, telling The Columbus Dispatch that Catholic schools have a “fundamental responsibility” to make sure their teachers uphold the teachings of the faith.

Gym instructor Carla Hale was fired from Bishop Watterson High School last month after an anonymous parent wrote to the Diocese of Columbus to complain that in an obituary for Hale’s mother, Hale was listed as a surviving family member together with her longtime lesbian partner, Julie. 

Hale signed a morality clause as part of her contract, affirming that “Catholic school personnel are expected to be examples of moral behavior and professionalism,” and acknowledging her employment could be terminated for “immorality” or “serious unethical conduct.”  Because the Roman Catholic Church holds homosexual behavior to be gravely immoral, the Diocese of Columbus found her to be in violation of her contract, and fired her.

In an exclusive interview with The Dispatch, Bishop Campbell said that while diocesan officials “don’t necessarily go looking for things like that,” Hale’s choice to publicly reveal her homosexual relationship left the diocese no choice but to terminate her employment.

Hale wants her job back and has filed a grievance with the teachers union, along with a formal complaint with the Columbus Community Relations Commission accusing the school of violating Columbus’s anti-discrimination ordinance. 

City law deems it is a misdemeanor for an employer to discriminate against an employee based on sexual preference, or to have policies which do so.  There is no exemption for religious organizations or other employers who object to homosexuality on religious grounds.  A guilty verdict carries penalties of up to 180 days in jail and a $1,000 fine.  The Community Relations Commission will evaluate Hale’s claim and decide whether to pass it on to the city prosecutor’s office.

Bishop Campbell told The Dispatch that the Church, the diocese and the school have been the targets of multiple threats since Hale’s firing. “It can be very intimidating,” Campbell said. “We are very concerned about that, but we have to remain steadfast in the teaching of the church.” 

A diocesan spokesman told The Dispatch that the diocese is paying for a Columbus police officer to be present on campus during school hours, and that local police have stepped up their patrols in the neighborhood. 

O desatino do povo de Deus em Portugal - por Nuno Serras Pereira

Nesta nação em que nos foi dado nascer e viver a maioria da sociedade, que se confessa católica, está inteiramente desnorteada pela propaganda quotidiana do que lhe é incutido pela maior parte dos políticos, de grande parte da comunicação social e a espaços por não poucos prelados. De facto, todo o mundo está persuadido de que o maior problema do nosso país, e quiçá do mundo, é a crise económico-financeira. Sem negar, de modo algum, a seriedade desta e a urgência de a ultrapassar deve-se, no entanto, afirmar que há assuntos bem mais graves, que passam ao lado daqueles que controlam o que devemos saber, os assuntos em que devemos pensar, as conversas que devemos ter.

Há aí alguém que tenha consciência de que no mundo de hoje, de cinco em cinco minutos, se assassina um cristão por causa da sua Fé? Quem se detém em noticiar e aprofundar a matança de cento e cinco mil cristãos exterminados, por causa da sua Fé, só no ano passado? E, todavia, sabemos que se tratasse de um punhado de irmãos judeus, ou muçulmanos, ou, mesmo, de um só “gay” (ou lgbt) o alarido seria interminável, com declarações solenes de repúdio, ao mais alto nível, com movimentações e manifestações de rua, “debates” unanimemente escandalizados nas televisões e nas rádios, comunicados e abaixo-assinados por tudo quanto é redes sociais e inter-rede, enfim, um clamor estriduloso. 

Claro que empedernidos num egoísmo indiferente podemos ignorar, em contradição flagrante com a nossa Fé - que opera pela Caridade -, e mesmo a simples solidariedade humana, os sofrimentos e as injustiças que padecem esses nossos irmãos, cuidando que estamos a salvo numa pacífica segurança norte-ocidental.

A verdade porém é que se algum cristão ou qualquer outra pessoa de boa vontade se julga seguro, ou é ignorante, ou é ingénuo, ou é lorpa. A enorme insensatez ou cegueira da maioria dos cristãos e dos católicos, incluindo altos prelados, tem consistido em não quererem ver, ou então em cumpliciarem-se com uma minoria extremamente activa que de ano para ano, imparável, determinada, persistente, imbatível, tem vindo a conquistar as mentalidades, a sugar as almas, a inverter a moral, a corroer o bem comum, a cancerar a subsidiariedade, a derrancar a solidariedade, a torpedear a eminente dignidade transcendente de cada pessoa humana, a minar as instituições, a dominar a comunicação social, a controlar a justiça, a manipular a política, a ludibriar os Pastores.

A decisão obstinada de muitos prelados em “trabalhar” nos “bastidores” com as autoridades tem, ao contrário de tantos outros países, deixado o povo de Deus ignaro da Doutrina, privado de defesas, rendido à mentalidade dominante, incapaz de resistência, entorpecido numa modorra, entibiado por uma identidade desmaiada, se não mesmo moribunda, inábil para o combate espiritual, seguidor de lobos vorazes, abandonado aos predadores.

Contra os falsos profetas de um optimismo vão, tantas vezes desmascarado nas Sagradas Escrituras, é imprescindível tomar consciência da realidade, dos factos, para que cooperando com a Graça de Deus se dê lugar à Esperança verdadeira.

Se não despertarmos e não “combatermos o bom combate” seremos cruelmente perseguidos, impiedosamente lançados às enxovias, obscenamente abusados, implacavelmente entregues ao matadouro.

É inteiramente verdade que Nosso Senhor Jesus Cristo nos avisou das perseguições e da Cruz, em especial aos primeiros cristãos, que, sendo uma minoria minúscula, tinham de conquistar a imensa massa de povos idólatras. Mas o Senhor não disse que fossemos esparvoados, imbecis, cobardes, indiferentes, atoleimados, que nos deixássemos enredar pelas subtilezas astuciosas do Inimigo. Não nos mandou que fossemos passivos diante da injustiça, da mentira, da manipulação, do desamor. Pelo contrário, imperou-nos que amássemos radicalmente guerreando o mal e o pecado com a fortaleza que nos comunica pelo Seu Espírito. Se os cristãos, em particular os católicos, assim o tivessem feito aquando dos repetidos alertas de Pio IX, de Leão XIII, de Bento XIV, de Pio X, de Pio XI, de Pio XII, teriam impedido as monstruosas tragédias do comunismo, do nazismo, do fascismo. Quanta catástrofe, quanta hecatombe, quanto flagelo, quanta calamidade, quanta assolação, quanta violentíssima crueldade se teria evitado; quantas vidas poupadas, quantas almas salvadas, quantas famílias mantidas, quantas cidades inteiras, quantas nações em pacífica harmonia!

A alucinação geral contemporânea em que estamos mergulhados leva muitos a suporem que nos dias de hoje não existem, nem de longe nem de perto, perigos, mais ou menos, semelhantes. Esta enorme ilusão é já, evidentemente, uma consequência da programada mesmerização colectiva a que temos vindo a ser submetidos. Os alertas, então, do Bem-aventurado João Paulo II e os, agora, do Papa Bento XVI foram e são frequentes. Quereremos nós imitar a irresponsabilidade ou a insensatez das gerações que nos precederam deixando que as minorias malignas provoquem novas calamidades?

25. 01. 2013

Extremistas musulmanes matan 6 personas e incendian iglesia en Nigeria en Nochebuena

LAGOS, 26 Dic. 12 / 08:03 am (ACI/Europa Press).- Un grupo armado atacó durante la Nochebuena una iglesia del norte de Nigeria y mató a seis personas antes de prender fuego al templo, según fuentes policiales citadas por la cadena de televisión estadounidense CNN.

Entre las víctimas figura un religioso, han explicado estas fuentes, que no han aclarado el lugar exacto del ataque.

Las fiestas de Navidad suelen ser días potencialmente peligrosos para los fieles cristianos que acuden a las iglesias de Nigeria, como quedó de manifiesto tanto el año pasado como en 2010. En la Navidad de ambos años se produjeron una serie de ataques que se saldaron con decenas de muertos.

Las autoridades culpan a la secta islamista Boko Haram, que trata de imponer la 'sharia' en el país africano, de estar detrás de los ataques contra cristianos. En Nigeria viven alrededor de 160 millones de personas que se reparten a partes prácticamente iguales entre musulmanes y cristianos.

Al menos 2.800 personas han muerto desde que Boko Haram se alzó en armas contra el Gobierno en 2009, según un balance de la ONG Human Rights Watch.

Sin embargo, esta secta no es el único grupo radical activo en la parte septentrional del país, donde también actúa Ansaru. Esta milicia se ha atribuido el asalto contra unas instalaciones de la policía en Abuya que permitió el mes pasado la liberación de cientos de presos y el secuestro, la semana pasada, de un ciudadano francés en la localidad de Rimi.

Religious Freedom, Persecution of the Church, and Martyrdom - by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò

First of all, I should like to thank John Cavadini, Professor of Theology and Director of the Institute for Church Life, for this kind invitation to be with you today to discuss an important set of interrelated topics: (1) religious freedom; (2) the persecution of Christians around the world; and, (3) martyrdom. But before I begin this task, I should also like to thank the University of Notre Dame for its sponsorship of this important conference, and especially its President, Father John Jenkins, for his hospitality, and for giving me the opportunity to get to know this prestigious institution of the Church. I also extend my fraternal and prayerful best wishes to the Most Reverend Kevin Rhoades, Bishop of Fort Wayne - South Bend, for his participation in this event and his warm welcome. As you may know, I am the representative of His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI to the United States, and so, in consideration of this official office I hold and exercise, I acknowledge to you all my profound gratitude to be with you today in order to address these important and timely subjects. 

In doing so, it is crucial to see that in the world of the present age, persecution of the faithful can manifest itself in a variety of forms, some obvious, but others less so. While it is necessary to remind ourselves of the obvious, we must also consider the not­so-obvious, for great danger to the future of religious freedom lies with religious persecution that appears inconsequential or seems benign but in fact is not. In my service to the Holy See, I have worked in various parts of the world including Iraq and Kuwait, Great Britain, Strasbourg, Nigeria, in the Vatican, and now the United States, it has been a part of my personal makeup and official duties to monitor and register concerns to my superiors about efforts that harm, intentionally or otherwise, the Church and God’s people. 

I realize that you have scheduled several prominent speakers who will address the critical questions dealing with religious freedom, persecution of Christians, and martyrdom in the present day around the globe. I do not wish to compete with them nor is in my intention to preempt their incisive and insightful comments which I am confident will elevate the mindfulness of your audience and potential readership about religious freedom, religious persecution, and martyrdom. Countries and regions where these challenges to the faithful exist are in China and Asia, Africa, Europe, the sub-Continent, the Middle East, and Latin America. Let me illustrate the problems in these countries with one example. The circumstances which our brothers and sisters in faith experience in the Peoples’ Republic of China are largely well known by many who follow international developments. The anguish which the Church faces in China has led Pope Benedict XVI to issue his 2007 letter to the Church in China to let the faithful of that great country, and of the world, know that the universal Church has not forgotten them and their faithful witness to Christ and to Christ’s Vicar on Earth. Similar problems exist elsewhere.

In nearby Pakistan and India, Christians face intimidation, sometimes with lethal consequences, which the civil authorities of these respective states seem incapable of arresting. Elsewhere, there are new pressures placed on religious freedom in Middle East, especially in Iraq and now in Syria, in parts of Africa including Egypt, Nigeria, the Sudan, and east Africa. The heavy burdens imposed on Christians in all of these regions can be, and often are, physical and harsh. In some instances, the faithful have witnessed their Christian faith at the expense of their lives which God gave them. In this regard, the heavy hand of so called “anti-blasphemy” laws has sometimes been the method to subjugate the Christian faith.

In all of these instances, we see that the faithful persist in their fidelity to Jesus Christ and his Holy Church! For throughout her history, the Church has gained strength when persecuted. We must recall the words of the Preface for Holy Martyrs from the second edition of the Roman Missal: God chooses the weak and makes them strong. In short, with God’s help we can prevail, but without Him, even our greatest human strength is insufficient because it is frail.

As the papal nuncio to the United States, I realize that I speak from a distinguished podium at a great university. It is my intention to propose for your consideration the interrelated matters of religious freedom, persecution, and martyrdom that are, or should be, of vital concern to you – for these grave concerns exist not only abroad, but they also exist within your own homeland. 

In order to establish a framework for my presentation, several key definitions are in order. I will first address the subject of martyrdom. What is it, and why is it relevant to you today? I am sure that most if not all of us are familiar with the martyrs of the Church – both past and present – who gave of their lives because they would not compromise on the principles of faith that accompany the call to discipleship. Theirs is the experience of great suffering that often includes torture and death. Some of the early martyrs of the Church experienced this through cruelty, often by slow means, designed to bring on death. However, the intention underlying the objectives of the persecutor is important to understand: it was to eradicate the public witness to Jesus Christ and His Church. An accompanying objective can be the incapacitation of the faith by enticing people to renounce their beliefs, or at least their public manifestations, rather than undergo great hardships that will be, or can be, applied if believers persist in their resistance to apostasy. The plan is straightforward: if the faith persists, so will the hardships. In more recent times, martyrdom may not necessitate torture and death; however, the objective of those who desire to harm the faith may choose the path of ridiculing the believers so that they become outcasts from mainstream society and are marginalized from meaningful participation in public life. This brings me to the meaning of persecution. 

Persecution is typically associated with the deeds preceding those necessary to make martyrs for the faith. While acts of persecution can mirror those associated with martyrdom, other elements can be directed to sustaining difficulty, annoyance, and harassment that are designed to frustrate the beliefs of the targeted person or persons rather than to eliminate these persons. It would seem, then, that the objective of persecution is to remove from the public square the beliefs themselves and the public manifestations without necessarily eliminating the persons who hold the beliefs. The victimization may not be designed to destroy the believer but only the belief and its open manifestations. From the public viewpoint, the believer remains but the faith eventually disappears. 

In the context of martyrdom and persecution, the law enforcement branches of the state can be relied upon to achieve the desired goal. The state’s enforcement mechanisms were surely employed in the campaigns that brought the deaths of the early Roman martyrs. The legal mechanisms of new legislation and its enforcement in Tudor England were relied upon in the persecution and martyrdom of Thomas More and John Fisher. As one thinks about these two heroic individuals, you can see the multiple objectives of the state. The first, in their sequential order, were words and then deeds designed to encourage through pressure More and Fisher to accept the King’s and Parliament’s wills to agree with the divorce of King Henry from Queen Catherine.

However, when Fisher and More remained resolved in their fidelity to the Church’s teachings about the validity of the marriage but discreet in how they did so, the state mechanisms designed to bring them and their views around were ratcheted up so as to increase the pressure on them. When they resisted the increased pressure, statutes were enacted and amended to make non-compliance a treasonable and, therefore, a capital offence. It was understood by Fisher, More, and the King’s agents that a hideous death rather than a lesser punishment was the inevitable penalty. It is said that while torture was recommended by some to hasten the compliance of Fisher and More, the King’s conscience would not permit it. Nevertheless, when increased levels of persecution did not achieve the desired result of modifying the views of Fisher and More, martyrdom by beheading – rather than hanging, drawing, and quartering – was the inevitable solution. In the cases of Fisher and More, persecution came first, and then it was followed by martyrdom. In both cases, religious freedom was the target. I now turn to religious freedom. What is it? 

Religious freedom is the exercise of fidelity to God and His Holy Church without compromise. Human action that reflects this fidelity is what has hastened martyrdom and persecution for many believers of the past, and of today. At the core of this fidelity is the desire to be a good citizen of the two cities where we all live: the City of Man and the City of God. This kind of dual citizenship necessitates libertas Ecclesiae, i.e., the freedom of the Church. This freedom is essential to the religious freedom which properly belongs to the human person. And this freedom that belongs to the human person is simultaneously a human, civil, and natural right which is not conferred by the state because it subsists in the human person’s nature. As the papal representative of the Holy See to the United States, the subject of religious liberty frequently surfaces in the international discussions that constitute a major part of my priestly service to our Church, to the Holy Father, and to you, my dear friends. 

It is evident that there is a pressing need to protect religious freedom around the world. However, this freedom is not something that can or should be imposed for it subsists on the Truth of God – “Truth can impose itself on the human mind by the force of its own truth, which wins over the mind with both gentleness and power”!¹ That there is recognition by many people of good will about this truth is reassuring given the fact that religious persecution and martyrdom are still present in the world today. This recognition, however, is often challenged by alarms registered by skeptics who question whether it is proper for there to be a public role for religion in civic life. 

We live in an age where most, but not all, of your fellow countrymen still share in the conviction that Americans are essentially a religious people. While current data suggests a progressive decline in religious belief across the western world including the United States, there still appears to be deference given to the importance of religion. But as I have just indicated, there are those who question whether religion or religious belief should have a role in public life and civic affairs. The problem of persecution begins with this reluctance to accept the public role of religion in these affairs, especially but not always when the protection of religious freedom involves beliefs that the powerful of the political society do not share. Thus we are presented with the pressing question about whether the devoted religious believer, let us say the Catholic, can have a right to exercise citizenship in the most robust fashion when his or her views on civic concerns are informed by the faith. The First Amendment of the United States Constitution more than suggests an affirmative answer to this question. But we should not be satisfied with this recognition. After all, important figures, some of whom hold high public office, are speaking today about the right of freedom of worship, but their discourse fails to acknowledge that there is also a complementary right about the unencumbered ability to exercise religious faith in a responsible and at the same time public manner.

In the remaining time that is allotted to me, I shall focus on these concerns and the emerging deleterious impact on the authentic and legitimate exercise of religious freedom within your great country. Let me address the concerns that I see about this fundamental and non-derogable right, on your home front. 

Let me begin by briefly stating that as a man of God and therefore a man of hope, it is essential to pray for a just resolution to the issues which face the faithful and their fidelity. As you may know, the Bishops of the United States conducted earlier this year the Fortnight for Freedom, and more recently in October a Novena for Life and Liberty, in order to elevate prayerful consciousness and other responsibilities of the faithful to ensure protection of the “First Freedom” cherished by your nation. One compelling catalyst for these initiatives is found in the legitimate concerns about religious liberty posed by the uncertainties surrounding the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; however, this is by no means the only source of concern. When Catholic Charities and businesses owned by faithful Catholics experience pressure to alter their cherished beliefs, the problem is experienced in other venues. In short, the menace to religious liberty is concrete on many fronts. Evidence is emerging which demonstrates that the threat to religious freedom is not solely a concern for non-democratic and totalitarian regimes. Unfortunately it is surfacing with greater regularity in what many consider the great democracies of the world. This is a tragedy for not only the believer but also for democratic society. Here we must consider the important point that religious freedom is not an end in itself, because it has as its highest purpose protection of the ultimate dignity of the human person.² This argument was acknowledged by Pope Paul VI at the conclusion of the Second Vatican Council in his address to the rulers of nations when he rhetorically asked the question “What does the Church seek from you?” 

She asks of you only liberty, the liberty to believe and to preach her faith, the freedom to love God and serve Him, the freedom to live and to bring to men her message of life. Do not fear her. She is made in the image of her Master, whose mysterious action does not interfere with your prerogatives but heals everything human of its fatal weakness, transfigures it, and fills it with hope, truth, and beauty.

Allow Christ to exercise his purifying action on society!... And we, His humble ministers, allow us to spread everywhere without hindrance the Gospel of peace... Of it, your peoples will be the first beneficiaries, since the Church forms for you loyal citizens, friends of social peace and progress.³

One illustration of interference with religious freedom, as outlined by Pope Paul, recently surfaced in England which has a Christian past and for centuries was one place where Christianity flourished. The 2010 decision of an English court in the case of Johns vs. Darby City Council, Queens Bench division, has essentially declared that an evangelical Christian couple is unfit to be legal guardians of foster children because of their faith which informs them that certain sexual expressions by consenting adults are sin. Mr. and Mrs. Johns, a devout evangelical couple, had successfully and lovingly served as foster parents for needy children in the past. In spite of their previous exemplary service caring for children who needed love and protection, the civil authorities of the United Kingdom expressed grave reservations about the continuing suitability of Christians who firmly pursue their Christian faith. As a result of the court’s decision, the exercise of religious faith which is protected in theory by juridical texts is, in fact, subject to forfeit. As the judges noted in their decision, the belief of Mr. and Mrs. Johns is based on “religious precepts” which can be “divisive, capricious, and arbitrary.”

Paradoxically, Mr. and Mrs. Johns were doing what is clearly protected by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights – texts which your nation claims to adhere to, and, in the case of the Covenant, is a party. The Johns’ religious freedom was sacrificed to practices which are today considered “rights” by many well educated persons but which are not mentioned in the applicable juridical texts as is religious freedom. If George Orwell were still alive today, he would certainly have material to write a sequel to his famous novel 1984 in which the totalitarian state, amongst other things, found effective means from distancing children from their parents and monopolizing the control of educational processes especially on moral issues. 

I am sure the Johns case will be discussed much more in the future. But we must take stock of the fact that the challenges to authentic religious freedom are not relegated to distant places such as England. My concerns about religious liberty and my efforts to protect them have a bearing on what is presently going on in the United States. Over the past months, we have heard much about the legitimate reservations raised by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops that pertain to authentic religious freedom and the proper exercise of faith in public. The issues and reservations identified by the Conference’s president, Cardinal Dolan, about the health care mandate dealing with artificial contraception, abortion-inducing drugs, and sterilization are very real, and they pose grave threats to the vitality of Catholicism in the United States. But we must not forget the other perils to religious liberty that your great country has experienced in recent years. Once again, we see that the rule of law, in the context of your First Amendment and important international protections for religious freedom, has been pushed aside. Let me cite some examples of these other hazards. 

A few years ago, the Federal courts of the United States considered the case of Parker v. Hurley in which a number of families were alarmed over the curriculum of the public schools in Lexington, Massachusetts (ironically one of your cradles of liberty!) where young children were obliged to learn about family diversity as presented in a children’s book that elevated as natural and wholesome same-sex relations in marriage. The Parker family and other families, who are Judeo-Christian believers, wished to pursue an “opt-out” for their children from this instruction. While they may not have been aware of it, their sensible plan reflected sound and reasonable rights that are addressed and protected by international human rights standards which are echoed in the Declaration on Religious Liberty, Dignitatis Humanae, of the Second Vatican Council.⁴ However, the civil authorities and the Federal courts disagreed with, and thereby denied, the lawful claims of these parents who were trying to protect their children from the morally unacceptable. If these children were to remain in public schools, they had to participate in the indoctrination of what the public schools thought was proper for young children. Put simply, religious freedom was forcefully pushed aside once again.

More recently, we recall the federal court review of Proposition 8 in California. In the legal proceedings surrounding this initiative dealing with the meaning of marriage, Judge Vaughan Walker said this about religious exercise – a freedom enshrined in your Constitution: “Religious beliefs that gay and lesbian relationships are sinful or inferior to heterosexual relationships harm gays and lesbians.”⁵ This “harm” cited by the judge became the basis for devising a mechanism used to minimize if not eradicate the free exercise of religion which includes the vigorous participation of the religious believer in public and political life.

On other fronts, we have witnessed Catholic Charities across the United States being removed from vital social services that advance the common good because the upright people administering these programs would not adopt policies or engage in procedures that violate fundamental moral principles of the Catholic faith. Furthermore, we have observed influential members of the national American community – especially public officials and university faculty members – who profess to be Catholic, allying with those forces that are pitted against the Church in fundamental moral teachings dealing with critical issues such as abortion, population control, the redefinition of marriage, embryonic stem cell commodification, and problematic adoptions, to name but a few. In regard to teachers, especially university and college professors, we have witnessed that some instructors who claim the moniker “Catholic” are often the sources of teachings that conflict with, rather than explain and defend, Catholic teachings in the important public policy issues of the day. While some of these faculty members are affiliated with non-Catholic institutions of higher learning, others teach at institutions that hold themselves out to be Catholic. This, my brothers and sisters, is a grave and major problem that challenges the first freedom of religious liberty and the higher purpose of the human person.

History can help us understand what is happening in the present moment to this first freedom. Catholics have, in the past, experienced and weathered the storms that have threatened religious freedom. In this context, we recall that Pope Pius XI took steps to address these grave problems in his 1931 encyclical letter Non Abbiamo Bisogno dealing with religious persecution of the faithful by the fascists in Italy, and in his 1937 letter Mit Brennender Sorge addressing parallel threats initiated by the National Socialists in Germany. In the context of Germany during the reign of National Socialism, we recall that the Oxford Professor Nathanial Micklem examined and discussed the persecution of the Catholic Church is Germany in his 1939 book entitled National Socialism and the Roman Catholic Church. The problems identified by Micklem over six decades ago that deal with the heavy grip of the state’s hand in authentic religious liberty are still with us today.

An Englishman who found his way to the United States, Christopher Dawson (who became a Catholic in his early adulthood) still reminds us that the modern state, even the democratic one, can exert all kinds of pressure on authentic religious freedom. Dawson insightfully explained that the modern democratic state can join the totalitarian one in not being satisfied with “passive obedience” when “it demands full cooperation from the cradle to the grave.” He identified the challenges that secularism and secular societies can impose on Christians which surface on the cultural and the political levels. Dawson thus warned that “if Christians cannot assert their right to exist” then “they will eventually be pushed not only out of modern culture, but out of physical existence.” He acknowledged that this was not only a problem in the totalitarian and non-democratic states, but “it will also become the issue in England and America if we do not use our opportunities while we still have them.”⁶

 

While Dawson made his observations in the 1950’s, we need to recall that Blessed John Paul II recognized the durability of the problems noticed by Dawson during the era that saw the collapse of the modern Soviet totalitarian state. In his 1991 encyclical Centesimus Annus, John Paul reminds us that “totalitarianism attempts to destroy the Church, or at least to reduce her to submission, making her an instrument if its own ideological apparatus.”⁷But he further noted that this threat is not solely expressed by the state established on dictatorship, for it can also be exercised by a democracy, for “a democracy without values easily turns into openly or thinly disguised totalitarianism.”⁸ Since the conclusion of the Second World War and the formation of the United Nations, democracies around the world have periodically exhibited traits of this new totalitarianism that emerges from a democracy-without-values, values that must be based on the timeless and universal moral principles adhered to and taught by our Church because these principles are founded on the Truth of Christ which came to set us free!

So, what can be done? Cardinal Dolan has recently exhorted the Catholic faithful to confront the challenges which the faith faces today. His brother bishops in this country and around the world have taken similar action. It is a desperate day when well-educated persons label these efforts as attempts by the hierarchy to control the activities of Catholics in public life. Some have even criticized publicly Cardinal Dolan’s call to the faithful to defend the Catholic contribution to political debate in this fashion: “Dolan to Lay Catholics: Be Our ‘Attractive, Articulate’, (and Unpaid) Flacks.”⁹ I pray that the authors meant well in saying this, in spite of the statement’s disparaging tone, but these persons fail to recall the nature of the Church as explained by the Second Vatican Council and reiterated by Blessed John Paul II in his Apostolic Exhortation Christifideles Laici (1988).

In this exhortation, the Pope urged the lay faithful to be mindful of their crucial role in temporal affairs as disciples of Christ rather than as elements of some political or secular ideology that bases its platform on an indecipherable formula established on the ambiguous foundation that unsuccessfully relies on the cure of “social justice.” It is the proper function of bishops to be teachers of the faith, but it is also true that the laity exercise a major role in implementing this same faith in the affairs of the world. This is why John Paul repeatedly encouraged the faithful with the words of Jesus: “You go into my vineyard, too” (Mt 20:4).¹⁰ In order to respond affirmatively to this call, religious freedom is essential.

We are still a far cry from fully embracing the Holy Father’s encouraging exhortation when we witness in an unprecedented way a platform being assumed by a major political party, having intrinsic evils among its basic principles, and Catholic faithful publicly supporting it. There is a divisive strategy at work here, an intentional dividing of the Church; through this strategy, the body of the Church is weakened, and thus the Church can be more easily persecuted. 

We must all be mindful that our Lord noted, time and again, that each member of the Church – clerical, religious, and lay – is a branch on the vine of Christ. In our unity with Him, we are a part of something universal – one faith, one belief displayed through a variety of talents, in a multiplicity of places. This is what our Lord asks us to do, and, therefore, this is what we must do: to preach and live the Good News and to do so in communion with our Lord, with the successors of His apostles, and with His Vicar. It is our faith, and it is our duty to live and proclaim the Gospel through the Church’s teachings so that by reasoned proposition, not imposition, God’s will and our discipleship can advance the common good for every member of the human family. This, my friends, is essential to authentic religious freedom because it is the means by which we fulfill the destiny of the human person. 

And so, let us go into the Lord’s vineyard together, with love, hope, freedom, the firmness of the convictions of our faith, and the help that God so willingly extends to us. We have been appointed by God and His holy Church to go forth and bear much fruit. Let us do so with the freedom and its necessary complement, responsibility, which God has given us. We further know that Christ is the way, the truth, and the life. What God has given, the servant state does not have the competence to remove. And God has given us the truth of His Son, the truth who gives us the most precious freedom of all, which is the desire to be with God forever! This is our destiny, and this is why religious freedom as I have explained it is of paramount importance. It is essential to the exercise of our other rights and responsibilities as citizens of the Two Cities.

Thank you very much. 

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò
Apostolic Nuncio to the United States 

Endnotes

1 Second Vatican Council, Declaration on Religious Liberty, Dignitatis Humanae, N.1.

2 This point was made by Father John Courtney Murray, S.J., who was a major contributor to the drafting of the Declaration on Religious Liberty; fn 23, The Documents of Vatican II, Declaration on Religious Freedom, Dignitatis Humanae, Angelus Publication, 1966, p. 688.

3 See, http://www.vatican.va/holyfather/paulvi/speeches/1965/documents/hfp-vispe19651208epilogo­concilio-governanti en.html.

4 The Declaration on Religious Liberty, Dignitatis Humanae, in N. 5, asserts, as do the UDHR and the ICCPR, that parents have rights concerning the moral education of their children which reflect their religious beliefs. The courts deciding the Parker case did not even mention these obligations in their decision.

5 Chief US District Judge Vaughn Walker, Perry vs. Schwarzenegger, Findings of Fact N. 77 (August 2010).

6 Christopher Dawson, “The Challenge of Secularism”, Catholic World (1956).

7 John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus on the 100th Anniversary of Rerum Novarum, 45, (1991); cf, Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Word of Today, Gaudium et Spes, 76.

8 Centesimus Annus, 46

9 Eduardo Peñalver “Dolan to Lay Catholics: Be Our ‘Attractive, Articulate’ (and Unpaid) Flacks,” Commonweal Magazine, dotCommonweal blog (5 March 2012).

10 John Paul II, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation on the Vocation and Mission of the Lay Faithful in the Church and the World, Christifideles Laici, 2 (1988).