Thomas Farr Defends Religious Freedom in a Deteriorating Domestic and International Situation

on July 9, 2015

Photo Credit: www.catholicnewsagency.com

Thomas Farr, Director of the Religious Freedom Project at the Berkeley Center for Religion, Peace, and World Affairs at Georgetown University, gave an overview of the current situation with respect to religious freedom in both the international and domestic arenas at an event connected with the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ annual Fortnight for Freedom at Mary Our Queen Cathedral in Baltimore on July 2. He described a deteriorating situation for religious freedom both at home and abroad, and discussed why religious freedom is important both to Christians and society at large.

Dr. Farr reviewed the extreme violence occurring in the Middle East, noting that while religious violence and intolerance comes from a number of sources, the worst is undoubtedly from extreme Muslim groups in the Middle East, both from ISIS and older groups such as al Qaeda and the al-Nusra Front. These groups are encouraged in their violence by standard practices connected with sharia law, where that is enforced by state authorities, in particular anti-blasphemy laws, which are used to silence and penalize not only non-Muslims, but also moderate Muslims, who question traditional understandings of the Koran and traditional practices. Merely questioning accepted interpretation in school or applying critical reasoning to the study of the Koran can result in violence, it was noted. Farr maintained that a more robust regime of religious freedom in the Muslim countries affected by terrorism would help resolve situations that lend themselves to violence. Other areas in which religious freedom is threatened are India, where a Hindu nationalist regime threatens the freedom of non-Hindus, and Russia, where the Russian Orthodox Church cooperates with the regime of Vladimir Putin in an effort to gain a “monopoly on religion in Russia.” In terms of violence and death occurring, Pope Francis has indicated that more Christians have died in recent years for their faith than perished during the Roman persecution of the early Christian centuries, Farr said, while he noted that the pope has declared the world is complicit by its silence in this destruction and death.

The West presents a distinct problem in the area of religious freedom, where secularism and the homosexual liberation movement endeavor to marginalize and stigmatize public expressions of religious belief and practice. He noted that Pew Research maintains that the religious freedom situation has gotten worse in both America and Europe. In Europe, religion is no longer seen as intrinsic to human dignity, but as somewhat dangerous opinion.

In the United States, Christians are legally harassed for conscientious objection against contributing to homosexual behavior. Farr noted in particular the case of Baronelle Stutzman in Washington state, a florist who was sued for declining to supply flowers to a homosexual ceremony. First offered a settlement by the ACLU in which she would pay a nominal fine, publicly recant, and contribute to an LGBT youth group, she declined and later received the same recantation demand from the Washington state attorney general. A superior court in Washington ruled that she must supply custom design work for the ceremony, and currently she faces ruinous fines. Farr noted in particular that the demand for recantation is one made in regimes of religious persecution in the past. Another example given was that Mozilla Fire Fox executive Brendon Eich, fired because of a $1,000 contribution to California’s Proposition 8 marriage campaign. Farr said that this kind of treatment is becoming the norm, and said it is a “dangerous turn in American law.” It is a turn to tyranny following the European pattern, especially that in France, where the doctrine of “laïcité” excludes religious opinion from politics.

Farr asserted that to give in to this intimidation is to declare that we are ashamed of the gospel. Capitulation would render Catholic doctrine dead letter. He noted that contemporary scholarship is discovering that religious freedom is necessary for every society. The medieval scholastics developed the idea of liberty of conscience, and the first sentence in the Magna Carta, commemorated last month for its 800th anniversary, was about the freedom of the church. Modern scholars are also discovering that religious freedom is good for business, and that it is important that religious beliefs be expressed in public life. The core doctrine of religious freedom is basic to American democracy and supported by the Catholic Church. In the international arena, secularism advanced by the cultural left cannot reasonably prevail as a basis for social order in most societies, as it will not, for instance, be able to get Islam out of the public square.

Farr then turned to ways advocates of religious freedom should address today’s challenges. It will be important to point out, he maintained, that religious freedom is a good way for society to prosper. There is stability in any society, independent of state power or the stability of the state, which is promoted by belief in God. On the other hand, advocates should note, if religious freedom is given by the state, it can be taken away by the state. Also, organized religion provides many social services that the state would otherwise have to provide. An example is Catholic Charities, which has benefited even those who are not Catholic, Farr said, but has run afoul of state prescribed morality in the West. The church’s doctrine pertaining to homosexuality, which is the focus of much of the conflict, is based on both divine revelation and what is manifest in human nature, and will not change, although the Church will continue to love and minister to homosexuals. It might be added to Farr’s comments, that while the state, at greater expense, might provide the same social services, a secular state cannot do so with the spiritual dimension added by traditional religion. With respect to the international arena, Farr said that America cannot convince the Muslim world to respect religious freedom if religious freedom takes a back seat in American policy to homosexual liberation.

Following his presentation, Dr. Farr entertained questions from the audience. One questioner asked if assisted suicide is the next item on the agenda against Christian morality. Farr responded that this possibility is the result of the doctrine, advanced by Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy in his decisions, that people are self-constituting. Thus decisions about the beginning and end of human life are human choices, not determined by an independent and unchanging human nature, but also, thus malleable to regulation by the state. Another questioner asked how Christians should respond to the comparison of opposition to homosexuality to racism. Farr seemed to indicate that this should be answered by appeal to human nature, with homosexuality held to be wrong by appeal to human nature, whereas the racism cannot be justified by appeal to human nature. Interracial marriage, for instance, is true marriage, and even racists in the past did not deny that it was true marriage, whereas homosexual marriage is not marriage. Farr said that it is marriage that is being defended. Another questioner asked if free speech was a better defense in liberty of conscience cases than religious freedom. Farr said that it might be, but that we should not give up religious freedom as a justification for liberty of conscience, since religious freedom is an important doctrine that must be defended. Another questioner asked if the ACLU would charge clergymen for not marrying homosexuals. Perhaps, Farr said, but Christians must stick to principle here; love does not mean weakness and staying out of the way. Secularists are operating out of bad faith in their appeals to principle; they just want to get Christians out of the way.

Other comments from Dr. Farr during the question time included the observation that many lawyers considered the five justice majority on the Supreme Court that imposed homosexual marriage on the country were wrong to do so; critical issues should not be decided by a few unelected judges. The constitutional government of the American founding attempts to both reduce the power of government, and increase the number of persons with the power of choice in government through constitutional provisions that are ultimately based on a Protestant understanding of original sin. Since people are corrupted by sin, it is dangerous to trust a few people with great power. This shows the role of religious freedom in a healthy society not only in providing meaning and value to life from a transcendent source, but also in acting as a check on tyranny.

No comments yet

The work of IRD is made possible by your generous contributions.

Receive expert analysis in your inbox.