Photo: Jessenia Martinez
We all know about Martin Luther King Jr.’s resistance to the unjust laws of the Jim Crow South. King believed that achieving justice sometimes necessitated breaking the arbitrary rules that flawed humans devise.
Similarly, in Latin America, where many of our families originated, priests often took a stand against the repressive authority of the oligarchies. Sometimes, as with Archbishop Oscar Romero, they paid with their lives. So it’s clear that religious leaders should urge their followers to disobey laws that are unjust or run counter to the principles of their faith…right?
Well, if that were the case, there would be little debate over the recent news that “Catholic bishops in the United States…have launched a campaign in the name of religious liberty, and say that laws that the church deems at odds with its moral teachings should not be followed.”
Latinos are one of the Catholic Church’s core groups, so the bishops are essentially telling a lot of Hispanics that American laws can sometimes be ignored.
What are some of these immoral government policies? Well, the bishops don’t want laws forcing them to cover birth-control costs for their workers, and some “have shut down their adoption and foster-care programs where the government would require them to place children with same-sex couples.”
OK, that doesn’t sound too much like King or Romero.
To be fair, the bishops are also fighting laws that target undocumented immigrants, and church leaders have been among the most vocal opponents of monstrosities like Arizona’s SB 1070.
Regardless of the specific objection, these clergymen claim a higher moral purpose, and they urge people in the pews to follow their example.
Let’s set aside the fact that religious leaders and their followers are members of society, and as such, have some obligation to follow the law. Let’s also ignore that religious institutions get tax breaks under the condition that they refrain from politics. In fact, many evangelical leaders have gotten into IRS trouble for proselytizing the social-conservative agenda, which they see as a moral issue.
The main problem with the bishops’ stance is that there is a major difference between fighting racial oppression and disapproving of gay people adopting kids. The line between moral outrage and arbitrary church doctrine is thin.
So by advocating for civil disobedience, church leaders have pulled off the impressive feat of simultaneously strengthening and weakening their position.
Yes, it’s true that because the government says, “It’s the law” doesn’t mean that it’s right. However, it’s also true that just because a priest says, “It’s in the Bible” or “It’s what the Pope decided,” doesn’t mean that it’s morally pure.
Each individual must call upon his or her own sense of justice. We must ask ourselves if we’re making truly ethical decisions, or if we’re just giving in to some authority figure, whether he’s a cop or a priest.
We have to take a hard look at both God and government, and ask if either of them know what they’re talking about.
About Daniel Cubias
Probably.
no they cannot government is set up to keep the 2 separate
it’s a come on .
it ought to be up for a critique by the people.
They r yes, jesse jackson & al sharpton r nothing but racist pigs.i don’t know what kind of christians r they but they dont act like the ones I know.al sharpton is a racist hateful man.
They cannot – the sovereign authority of any nation is the Government or Law of the land… You can certainly protest a law you don’t agree with (in the US at least), but you cannot disobey, or else face charges in a court of law.
Yes you can disobey and face the consequences. What you cannot do is stand idly by while the state takes away your rights.
No.
Not legally.
Great article by the way!
It seems not legal, to tell you the truth, but that’s what power can make you believe, or do, or say. They are very empowered by people, so if the article’s statement is correct, it is a matter of changing people’s mind, so that they could see clearly that law exists for some reason, that you have the right to fight for what you think agrees with your believes, but also, that you cannot, or shouldn’t let other people think by yourself.
when the Church stands by our brothers and sisters who have migrated to this country without proper documentation, they are only saying that regardless of invisible lines in the dirt, where ever you are, it is every human’s responsibility to treat eachother with dignity and respect. When the Church decides to stand by the unborn, they are saying that regardless of what stage of development you are at in life, you are a person and you are deserving of dignity and respect. it is the same message. the Church is not trying to obstruct the business of government, the Church is clearly saying that while the government may say one thing, it (the Church) doctrinally does not have to support the state. that is why we have a seperation of church and state. Jesus Himsel set up the seperation between church and state when He said, “render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and unto God what is God’s.” clearly drawing a distinction between secular and ethereal governments. We need to remember (PLEASE) that the recent objection by bishops of the HHS mandate is not an attempt to outlaw abortions, or ban contraceptives from the US. the Church is merely stating that for 2,000 years, it has maintained a doctrine that ALL life is sacred. Even though it may not be the popular decision or opinion, it is the Church’s decision and opinion to make. I am a Catholic. Some of us here on “Being Latino’s” wall may not be. But as Latinos we should recognize that the Church has played an intregral and historic role in the shaping of our lives in particular. the intentions of individual men may have been bad in the past, but the genuine concern for our people has been in earnest. It is because of the moral views (of the Church) that I have been taught in my upbringing, that ensure that I will always do everything I am able to do for our Latino community, globally. there has been bad, but the good that has been done, “la fuerza de cohesion”, far outweighs the bad. kindly don’t judge the Church with undue harshness, because during all of our struggles, in our entire, long and great history, the priests have stood next to us. they rang the church bells in Buenos Aires to proclaim the new Republic, the rang the church bells in Mexico to proclaim independence from Spain. When the dirty wars were happening in South America, priests were their, trying to help families stay together. When earthquakes and hurricanes slammed Chile, Honduras and Haiti, the Church is always a first responder. they will ALWAYS be there for us, so we (even if we disagree) should not come down harshly on the Church for simply maintaining their position.
Good one
*Not only does the Church have the right to denounce any law that does not abide by their doctrines, it is their duty to exercise such right. Prime example supporting my point is Pope Pius XII who did not speak up against Hitler and his “laws”. Doing so would have spared so many lives. The truth is that the court of law does (in some cases) excuse some people of their obligation to abide by laws that go against their religious beliefs. At the end of the day, we (as individuals) have the free will to obey or disobey the laws of our land, as well as the laws of our Faith. We just need to realize that we will face consequences set forth by a judge in a courtroom, and ultimately, by our ONLY true Judge in Heaven. It is what it is!
Yes. It was clergy that, with so many others, advocated for Civil Rights in the 60′s. An unjust law is anathema. While we sometimes do not agree with religious leaders on this or that issue, we must respect their right to stand for their own principles. The only thing is the fine line between advocating against what they believe is an unjust law (well within the principles of separation of church and state) and advocating for or against a candidate or political party. In effect, I say, my priest belongs in my confessional, not my voting booth! If a priest or rabbi or reverend or imam takes a political stance, then that person has turned a church or temple or synagogue from a house of God into a town hall. That should immediately negate the tax-free status chruches in America have held for over 200 years.