A MAGAZINE OF RELIGIOUS FREEDOM

LIBfRTY (bllp:/lwww.hllertymapzine.org/)

Navigation

EIIIAL (IIAILTD:? FACEBODK TWII1IR (HTTP:mwnau:GIIIIHGIIE? GOGGLe. IUBJa:r-NOVEIIIBBWB:EIEIER r TPII:IMWIIU'AC:EBOOK.COIIIIIIHf...'UIUIIIARI. Jlllll8olfi11':/IWIIWIU.BERniiiNiAZINE.ORIIM Ill- 800CILECO..uuE?

.;.;,MBODY�.MWWI..BERniiAOAZINE.CI T aU&iiB&& tJ I'IIIAGAZIIE.ORGI8IIWJIIIOWIIIBER- ll'� 2011) • :RL-HnP..JIIIWMI.IINRT'YiiiAGAZIIE.ORCMII DECBIIBERatl) DECS.EJI.IOII) DECBIIBIR.a'll)

Editorial

Behold the Man (http://www.libertymagazine.orglarticle/behold-the-man)

I wu happy to see the pope trealed with ��UCh dignity, even as I wu uncDmfortable at any

religiOWileader being given a political pulpit.

Courtship Between Church and State (http://www.libertymagazine.org/article/courtsbip-between­church-and-state)

Pope FJBDCial made history and cballeoged the UDi.ted. States conatitution by his visit.

Beck to Top

Terro:rbm Ia Om•d•

�ttp:l.lwww�artitJaltvroriu-IJ!..c:en•de)

.,_., __ .. llllllly __ _

Our Commo• Home

�ttp:/Jwww.llbertymqe:dlle.ol'lferCidlriOOH; mmu.!tome)

,.. .....

A MAGAZINE OF RELIGIOUS FREEDOM

LIBfRTY (bllp:/lwww.hllertymapzine.org/)

Navigation

Editorial

Behold the Man

Published in the Nuvember/December 201J (http:/lwww.libertymagfiZine.org/i88IU!Inuvember-december-101J) MagtJZine

Editorial, by Lincoln E. Steed {hltp:/lwww.libertymagtmne.orglauthorllincoln-e.-ateed)

::.AIL (IIALTO:?IUB.IECJIIIIEHOLD THE IW:EBOOK 1'1lllll1lR CHTTP:ttnlllrTliU:OIIIIHOIE.? GODGLE+ # , .IIUODY4TTP'.IIWWW.I.8ERniiAOAZIIE.C II" asus&&nEOOK.COIIIIIIHARERI8HA .........-n>:MMIU.8ERI'tMAGAZINE.ORGII f;.IW 1-• QOOQLE.COIIniWIE?

THE-MAN) J mP'JIWWWUBIRniiAGAZitE..DRGfAimCI..IoiiiEHOLD- TIE-111M) o :fii.IIHnP'..IMWIIIILIBIRniiAGAZitE.ORGUU lltEoiiM) THE-MAN)

September 24, 201S! A date I will not forget, and a date maJbd by the signifieeDCe of the evcmts.l have pul it away somewhere deep in my memory

alcmaside the day President Ke:Jmedy was asSUiiDatecl aDd the day the twin towers fell. It was just as historic.

Mmy great aod powerful leaden have addreaaedjoint aessiom of the u.s. Ccmgreas. While the Marquis de La.fltyeUe spoke to Coagress m 1824, he ac:tually

spob sepamtely to the House and the Seua1e one day apart. Kmg Kslakaua of Hawaii spoke to the joiDt houses m 1874, some little time befoR such titles

ceaaed to have meaning in his homeland. President Charles de Gaulle took the honora in 1960---it would be many yeBlll before lieeclom friea became de

rigueur in Washington. In 1992 Rmlim president Borill Yelt!lin gave a great speech in Congress, juBt a year before he sent troops to occupy his own

legislature. ADd DOt too lcmg ago Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu used the occasion to play party politics. It all tnalres Wmston Chun:bill's three

speeches to the group seem like a romp in the thousarul-ecre wood But in reality these are. ODe way or another, highly charged moments of political theater.

One cao &ee why religious leaders have been conspicuously absent from the bookinp.

Well I know of one previous attempt to invite a mipous leeder---cmly a few months ago the da1ai lama was struck from his invitation because he was too

c:cmtemious a figuM. One presumes that meant the ChiDcse might object: after all, other than accusing them of industri&l espiouage aDd� in U.S.

electiona, we are uaually careful DOt to offend a people to whom saving filc:e ia so impotbwt.lt would have been a little leu than 11tartling to have actually

heard the dalai lama give his UIIWil mix of upbeat aphorisms aDd New Age Ullivenal brotherhood. After all, it's not like he would have atl8ckecl capitalism or

done anything stupid like that!

Back to September 24: BDd with about SS,OOO (accordiDg to a security pcr9011l quizzed about attendance numbets) others I waited a few hours on the green

grass behind (in front of!) the U.S. Capitol, watching the giant Videottons for sips of the approaching pontiff. It bad begun as a clear, potentially b��.

SlDIDY day, but after some IIJIPareDt � ovahead a light shading haze set in, aud we happily waited for the pontiff. Beck to Top

My personal sojourn in Washington began way back in the mid sixties, and I've seen a few things, including the March on Washington and the riots of 1968

following Martin Luther King's assassination. I have seen police cars with windows taped against crowd violence and light military vehicles crammed with

National Guardsmen (men only back then!). But I have never seen anything like the array of security services brought to bear on the event September 24.

There were ATF agents in full attack gear, border police, Secret Service, FBI, capital police, Immigration, Homeland Security, Military Police and regular

military, and maybe more. The area well clear of the Capitol was blocked off to pedestrians and cars and tall chain-link fencing funneled attendees to security

stations run with a rigor that made the airport treatment seem mild. Why all the security? Beyond prudent measures I fail to see a Pope as a particular target,

the May 13, 1981 attempted assassination of John Paul II notwithstanding. All I could deduce is that it was a massive political event.

When the sergeant at anns introduced "the pope of the Holy See," I was a little taken aback. I had feared it might be "His Holiness ... " After all, not all titles

are to be repeated automatically, as some claims might nonnally be expected to cause some distress, especially that in a once- Protestant society. I had

expected "the Pope of Vatican City," since by way of the 1929 Lateran treaty and the Mussolini grant of papal sovereignty over 110 acres the pope is head of

an actual mini-state. The Catholic Church takes the See to be not only Rome, the bishop ofRome's jurisdiction, but also all the Sees of archbishops around

the world. This is a little more than a city-state. I went to the State Department Web site and found they understand this. It reads, "The Holy See is the

universal government of the Catholic Church and operates from Vatican City State, a sovereign, independent territory. The pope is the ruler of both Vatican

City State and the Holy See." I would think any national leaders would hesitate to acknowledge a "universal government." Up until Ronald Reagan the U.S.

hesitated to do that, even though Richard Nixon tried. The inhibition was simple and twofold: Protestant sensibility and memory was still strong, and

republican realities meant that such a state presented certain constitutional incompatibilities. But that was then, and as Senator Rick Santorum famously said a

little more than five years ago: ''Protestantism in this country [United States] ... is in shambles, [and] is gone from the world of Christianity."

I was happy to see the pope treated with such dignity, even as I was uncomfortable at any religious leader being given a political pulpit.

The U.S. is a civil nation and always ready to face a situation with optimism. Like the Roman Catholic Church, there are moments in our history usually

forgotten and regretted: a Protestant sensibility in earlier days sometimes mo�phed into Klu Klux Klan white Protestant American violence; anti-Catholic riots

in Cincinnati, Philadelphia, and New York. These sentiments even interfered with the election of John F. Kennedy-who promised that no church leader

would direct his presidency, and meant it. But the upside was a society with deep Protestant roots and a conviction that religious liberty was best protected by

keeping the Roman Catholic Church and all the other churches from exercising more than moral influence over the running of government. Maybe those days

are fast passing too.

I listened closely to the pope's nicely rehearsed speech and most of it was unassailable. Who but a flat earther could oppose respect for the environment and

concern for our fellow human beings? Platitudes aside, it was actually less religious than socially political.

But there were the troubling allusions to oft-stated papal agendas. Francis noted Moses at the beginning: In the encyclical on the environment a line is drawn

from the law given to Moses and Jewish and Catholic holy days as memorials of creation. I was encouraged that the document recognized the God-given

seventh-day Sabbath, and troubled as always at the recommendation of a Sunday substitution that owes its origin not to God but to the "venerable day of the

sun" and the willingness of a forgetful early church hierarchy to assume the right to change it.

There was the repeated phrase ''the common good." It sounds good, but can easily justify group action over individual rights. There was ''reciprocal

subsidiarity'' which repeated the Vatican claim that the state is "subsidiary," to the church and mixed in a vague assumption of dabbling in state affairs. And

maybe it was just a speechwriter tone-deaf on American history, but I found the appropriation of Abraham Lincoln odd, since his assassination was widely

assumed to be a Jesuit plot. Four conspirators were hanged and at least as many others imprisoned-one having been chased to Rome, where he had enlisted

in the papal bodyguard. Almost all were Roman Catholics, and of course Confederate sympathizers. History has moved on. but its shadow cannot be erased

so easily.

The speech over, we made our way home through unnaturally empty streets--the pope on his way to another triumphal event elsewhere. May God bless him

as he spreads a message of common humanity. He and the dali lama do a great service when they speak that way. But I hope never does this pope or any

religious leader of any religion have the political entre to recommend to lawmakers the dictates of catechism, Koran or Bible. Leave that to the conscience

alone.

Author: Lincoln E. Steed (http://www.libertymagazine.orglauthor!lincoln-e.-steed) Lincoln E. Steed is the editor of Liberty magazine, a 200,000 circulation religious liberty journal which is distributed to political leaders, judiciary, lawyers

and other thought leaders in North America. He is additionally the host of the weekly 3ABN (http://3abn.org) television show "The Liberty Insider," and the

radio program "Lifequest Liberty."

A MAGAZINE OF RELIGIOUS FREEDOM

LIBfRTY (bllp:/lwww.hllertymapzine.org/)

Navigation

Published in the Nuvember/December 201J (http:/lwww.libertymagtiZine.org/iaauelnuvember-d«ember-201J) MagtlZine

by Edwin Cook (http:/lwww.libertymagtiZine.org/autllorled-oook)

E11AL (IIIAILT0:71UB.ECTIICOURT8HP FN:EBOOK TWII1Bl(HTTP:#nlllna.COMIHOIIE.1' OOOOLE+ III!IMI!NCHwtCHAM) r TN:IIWMU'ACI!IOOK.CO� �MM!tL81!1t!'tMAGAZINI!.ORGII fo.f-!PJ COGLI!.COIIniWIIE?

,.;ATE&IIOIJYoHJ11IMM!li.BI!RTYIIIAGAZINE I _,_. LUGAZitE..ORG/AIOlC�URCH.AIIIJoCDm!) 1 :fii.IIHnP'..IIWWIIIII.IBERniiAGAZitE..OIUWU lllmi!IEDI�H�4TATIQ IENEEN�URCIWINNrMli) IIIEnllilltoCHURCII.IIIm4TATIQ

In September 20lS Pope Francis I made history by addressing a joint session of the United States Congress. His address to tho U.S. Congress was historic for

several reasons. Not only is he the 1iJ:st pope to speak before the bicameral legislature, but abo his acticms call into question the American concept of

sepamtion of church and stste.

American Founclen, such aa ThoDilll Jefferson, James Madison, ct al., WCR well euough ac:quaiDicd with European hi.stmy to lmow 1hat 1hey wished to found

a goverJ��Dmt "without a king and a chwdl without a pope."

The Roman Cadlolic Church had been ao heavily involved in European politics for centuries that anti-Cadlolic sentiment ran Btrong among citizeDI of the

founding era. Such aentiment continued to exist through011t American history, demonstrating itself in the burning of Catholic churchea during the early 1800!1

in what some scllolars have tenned "the Protestant Crusade."l Anti-Catholic political smtiment was manifested in the mid-1800!1 through the Know-Nothing

Party (later mwned as dlo American Party). By tho early 1900s, opposition to Roman Cad!Dlieism in politics was notably evident in tho defeat of pteSidcmtial

camtidale Alfred Smi1h, who waa the mat Catholic to nm for PMidcmt.

It was not until the 1960 pteSideDtial election of John F. Kem1edy that Roman Cad!Dlics began to be accepted into mainslleam American life, both socially

and politically. Ke!medy's bid for the White House filced strong opposition from Protestant clergy, wbo were conc:emed with whether his allegiance would be

to the pope or to 1he American republic. ThiB became known u "dle religious question" during the presidential debates. After addreaaing a joint gathering of

Protestant clergy in HOUlton aDd dilllllisaiDg any fean of hidden loyaltiea to Rome. Kemledy went on to win the election aDd become the finrt Roman Catholic

president. Kemtedy's acti01111 on "the scllool question"-whether Catholic parochial scllools should receive public tax dollars or not-demonstrated his

Beck to Top

commitment to upholding the concept of separation of church and state: he disallowed public taxes to support Catholic private education. However, his

actions infuriated American Catholic bishops, who turned decidedly against him--a stance still held by the current United States Conference of Catholic

Bishops (USCCB).2 Perhaps all Catholic legislators can glean some wisdom from John Kennedy, who was a widely popular president while in office.

Pope F!'811Cds addrellsiDg the joint session of Congress.

About three decades later the Roman Catholic Church played a pivotal role in the fall of

Communism in Europe. Allying itself with U.S. secret intelligence forces, dubbed by 7ime

as "the Holy Alliance,"3 both the church and the U.S. overthrew a common threat, resulting

in the fi:eedom for the church to achieve its mission in society and the advancement of

democracy. However, in retrospect, one may ask whether the CIA was utilizing a powerful

religious entity to overthrow a political rival, or whether it was being used as one of the

leading political powers in the modern world to accomplish papal aims.4 U.S. Secret Service

agencies, recognizing how much power and influence the Catholic Church wielded through

the fall of Communism, closely monitored Pope John Paul n every time he visited

America.S

Against such a historic backdrop, Pope Francis I is certainly attempting great things on

behalf of the Roman Catholic Church. News analysts such as David Gibson in the April30, 2015, article of the Religion News Service identified six items

that were likely on Francis I's agenda before the U.S. Congress.6 His list includes: welcoming immigrants, battling economic inequality, fostering strong

families through economic justice, protecting the environment, fighting partisanship in politics, and promoting dialogue rather than ideology.

Immigration and a Republian Legilll.ature

Since the current legislature is composed predominantly of conservative Republicans, Pope Francis I may have a hard sell on some of his views. On the issue

of immigration, the pontiff encouraged Congress to take a more receptive stance toward immigrants, many of whom come from Latin American countries and

who are Roman Catholics. Support for the immigrant population in America could affect votes at the polls and help America to become a predominantly

Roman Catholic country. Right now analysts estimate that 24 percent of Americans identify themselves as Roman Catholic. 7 Maybe the Vatican coat of arms

will one day fly over the White House and U.S. Capitol instead of the ISIS banner, as some radicalized Muslim extremists have threatened. This may seem a

foolish comparison, but it is the far more likely of the two.

Economic Issues

Regarding economic issues, Francis I supports Catholic social concepts of dis1ributism to foster a more just economic society. Distributism favors the

distribution of private ownership of property among the greatest number of citizens possible. In this regard, it differs from socialism, which seeks to eliminate

private property. Also, distributism does not seek to eliminate the state structure of society.8 Therefore, those embracing distributism frown upon a capitalistic

society, seeing it as evil and fostering greed. Legislators got some candid remarks from the austere Francis I regarding economic disparity and some chiding

for monetary greed.

Environmental lssnes

Francis I expressed to the U.S. Congress some of the concerns contained in his recent encyclical, Laudato Si', which denounces the destruction of the

environment solely for material gain. In light of statistical information that shows the United States ranks second among those nations producing the largest

amount of carbon dioxide emissions9 and is the country of origin of several oil magnates renowned for destructive oil spills, the pontiff delivered some

stinging words of correction.

Politieal Catholleilm

In view of the history of an embattled Congress in recent years, Francis I promotes dialogue and the need to avoid partisanship in politics. For those American

Catholics who support political views that run contrary to church teaching, Francis I reminds them that God should come fust, even before political views. In

essence, the pontiff is encouraging Catholic politicians to live their faith in public office, the very issue that Kennedy decided not to do, since his public office

required him to uphold the U.S. Constitution.

Cburdl-and-State Relations

RegardiDg church-and-state issues, some would argue that Pope Francis I is merely fulfilling his political role as an ambassador from the Vatican City State.

However, others would argue that� pontiff also serves as a religious leader of a particular faith group. For a comparative argument, Native American Indian

land, often referred to as the ''rez" (reservation), is recognized by the U.S. Government as independent and sovereign territory. How often have Native

Back to Top

American religious leaders been allowed to address a joint session of the U.S. Congress to express their concerns regarding deforestation of tribal lands (some

of which are sacred sites) that have been exploited merely for monetary gain by American logging companies? How often have tribal leaders been allowed to

address our nation's legislature regarding poverty-stricken and destitute living conditions on the reservation?

The formal establishment of political ties with the Vatican has been contentious from the time of President Franklin Roosevelt, who first attempted to assign a

U.S. ambassador to the Vatican in 1933. Roosevelt's efforts were decried by the populace and rejected outright, based on the principle of separation of church

and state. By the 1980s Ronald Reagan had fostered favorable ties with the Vatican and accomplished what no other president could do-formally recognize

the Vatican as a legitimate state by assigning to it a U.S. ambassador. Through such ties the Reagan administration was able to facilitate a working

relationship with Rome that resulted in the fall of Communism. However, the singular point of contention from a church-state perspective is that every U.S.

ambassador to the Vatican must be a Roman Catholic approved by the Papacy, a fact known by few Americans. In 2009 the Vatican informally rejected

Obama's nominees, an action dcscnbed by the Italian national paper Il Giornale as a ''trial of strength between Barack Obama and the U.S. church that

involves the Holy See."lO Why should Roman Catholicism receive such favor above all other religious groups? And one should ask a far more serious

question: Why do American citizens not realize the struggle between a foreign religious entity and our national government whose outcome will ctirectly

impact the future direction of our country and our civil liberties?

An additional point of grave concern from a church-state perspective regards official, diplomatic agreements with the Holy See. Vatican Council II (1962-

1965) promised great reforms within the church and with regard to its extra-ecclesial relations. While many changes did occur, the church did not alter its

standard practice of establishing formal ties with other states. Historically, these agreements were referred to as concordats.11 Typically, they not only

formalized political relations between the Vatican and other states, but also included provisions for the favoring of the church and its adherents, especially in

those states where Catholics were the majority. Provisions varied from one concordat to another, but usually guaranteed recognition of the Catholic Church as

the one true religion and some form of state support for Catholic schools and churches. Most often, such support was public tax dollars being given to those

schools and clClgy immunity from civil proceedings.

Regarding the former practice, perhaps America is gradually adopting this custom through school vouchers? Regarding the latter practice, clerical immunity

was based on the superior role claimed by the church in society: priests were considered above civil law and courts, instead being tried by ecclesial courts in

cases of criminal allegations. Thus far, American society retains its concept of religious neutrality that clerics (and Protestant pastors, or other religious

leaders) are not exempt from civil laws and cannot be tried in purely religious courts in cases of criminal acts.

There is one other factor that makes Pope Francis I's address to the U.S. Congress an historic event-yet American citizens and constitutional scholars voiced

little, if any, opposition to it One would expect that within a modern, liberal democracy such as America, which also champions religious pluralism and

government benevolent neutrality toward religion, more groups would decry governmental violation of the separation of church and state. Previous

generations of American citizens have shown great concern and care in protecting our civil and religious liberties. One must ask if that commitment

continues; or why it has been set aside in this case.

1 Ray Allen Billington, The Protestant C111Sade, 1800-1860: A Study of the Origins of American Nativism (Chicago: Quadrangle Paperbacks, 1964).

2 "[Kennedy's Houston speech] was sincere, compelling, articulate--and wrong. Not wrong about the patriotism of Catholics, but wrong about American

history and very wrong about the role of religious faith in our nation's life" (Archbishop [Charles] Chaput: "John F. Kennedy's View of the Role of Catholic

Faith in Public Service Was Wrong," speech given at Houston Baptist University, Mar. 2, 2010, Houston, www.catholic.org/politics/story.php?id=35640

[accessed Aug. 5, 2015]).

3 Carl Bernstein, "The Holy Alliance: Ronald Reagan and John Paul II," 1ime, Feb. 24, 1992.

4 "Today, in the opening years of the twenty-first century, no one hears of Vatican secret services like the Holy Alliance. In the world of contemporary

espionage the papal secret service (both espionage and counterespionage) is dubbed The Entity. Whatever it is called, its guiding principles are the same as

they were when Pope Pius V created the body in the year of our Lord 1566. Defense of the faith, defense of the Catholic religion, defense of the interests of

the Vatican state, and complete obedience to His Holiness continue to be the four great pillars that will carry it into the far reaches of future history. AB long as

the Catholic Church continues to spread its faith to the ends of the earth, The Entity will continue to pursue any enemy that may appear in the path of the

supreme pontiff or his policies. Meanwhile, to this day, the Vatican state continues to deny that its espionage service exists" (Eric Frattini, The Entity, trans.

Dick Cluster [New York: StMartin's Press, 2008]), p. 351.

5 From folder entitled "Pope John Paul II and CIA Files," in The Paperless Archives, The Library Collection, DVD-ROM, Disc No. 7 (BACM Research:

1999-2007), available at W. R. Poage Legislative Library, Baylor University, Waco, Tex.

6 David Gibson, "Six Things to Expect in the Pope's Address to Congress," Religion News Service, April 30, 2015, www.religionnews.com/2015/04/30/6-

things-apect-popes-address-congress/ (accessed July 16, 2015).

7 www.adhcrents.com/rel_USA.htmJ#Pew_branches (IICOL".tSedAug. S, 2015).

8 David W. Cooney, ''Diatributism Basics: Distributism Venus Socialism." Ethika Polltlka, Aug. 12, 2014, (https://etbikapolitika.org/2014108/12/distributiam­

basics-distribu.t:i.!IID.·VI·IIOcialisml Ba:CIICd Aug. S, 2015).

9 Union of Concenred Scientist�, "Each Country's Share of� Emission�," www.ucs1188..mg/global. _ warming/BciCJK:c _and_ impacts/Bcience/each-COUIII:ryB-­shan:-of-c:o2.html#.VcFBhUvxVT4 (acccssed Aug. 4, 2015).

10 Chris Mc:OreBI, ''Vatican vetoes Barack Obama's nominees fur U.S. ambassador," in Tire Guaniitm, Apr. 14, 2009, www.thcguardian.com/ world/2009/apr/14/vati.can-vetoes-obama-nominees-abo.rtion (accessed Aug. 5, 2015).

11 Francesco Margiotta Broglio, "Concordat," in The Papacy: An Encyclopedia, ed. Philippe Levillain (New York: Routledge, 2002), p. 396.

Author: Edwin Cook (http://www.libertymagazine.org/author/ed-cook) Edwin Cook has a doctorate in clmrch-state studies from the J .M. Dawson Institute at Baylor University. He writes from Waco, Texas.

1 Comment Liberlr 1 A MaGazine of Religious Freedom

• Join the discussion ... �

• Harbert Badenmann • 11 ya11r 11QD

� "Courtship Between Church and State"? In Europe we no longer apeak about "church and state" but rather •religion and state" "" v • Rsply • Share >

Cupyript C 2017 Nurth ADuiean Divilrion of the Sevenfh·day � O.un:h (http;/fwww�orW). Liberty® ia a tcgillla'cd trademark of'lhc Gcocral Omfcz'cm:c Corporlltion of S�:��Cidb-day A.dvcotiatB ® (htlp:ffwww.advcatist.org/). Liberty ® (ISSN 0024-2055) i& pablillhed 'bimoDihly by tile North Amfrican Di'rilion of tile Seventh-day Adveatillt ClmrdJ..

8Loain �

Sartby ...... 9

BatoTop

A MAGAZINE OF RELIGIOUS FREEDOM

LIBfRTY (bllp:/lwww.hllertymapzine.org/)

Navigation

Published in the Nuvember/December 201J (http:/lwww.libertymagfiZine.org/i88IU!Inuvember-december-101J) MagtJZine

by Reuel S. .Amdur (http:/lwww.libertymllgazine.org/author/miel-s.-amdtu')

:.OWL (IIIALT0:11UBJ�- It IW:EBOOK 1'1lllll1lR CHTTP:ttnlllrTliU:OIIIIHOIE.? GOOGLE+ f J JIADMIIODY�.MWW.I.8ERniiAOAZI r -..-.-- III'OIIIIIIHARERI8HA .........-n>:MMIU.8ERI'tMAGAZINE.ORGII f;.IWU- CIQLE.COIIniWIE?

� J mP'JIWWWUBIRniiAGAZitE..DRGfAimCI..IoiJEIIIRGRIIIIII- lt.cANADAj o :fii.IIHnP'..IMWIIIII.IBIRniiAGAZitE.ORGUU IN� �

On October 20, 2014, 25-year-old Martin Couture-Rouleau slammed his car into a group of soldiers in 1he paddng lot of a caaada shopping cent« in Saint­Jeen-sur-Richelieu. Quebec:, killing two. In the pmsuit that followed, he was shot aDd killed when he got out of his WftCked car and brandished a knife. Then two days laMr Michael Zchaf-Bibeau, age 32, shDt aDd killed a reservist atandiag guard at tbe war memorial in OUawa. He tbm quickly made his way to die Parliament, storming in with rifle in hand. One lllaft'er managed to puah the barrel down, suffering a ahot in the foot. Then during a firefight, the ��e�pmkt­IIDIIll ahot and killed him. Members of Parliament were cowering behind barricaded doors during the attack.

The two men had some tbillgs in common. Bo1h were converts to Islam in an exlreme form. Botb, Zehaf-Bibeau more than Couture-Rouleau, had madal healdl, petty crimiDal, and substance abuse problems. Zebaf-Bibeau sometimes committed crimes in the hope that he might shake his addictiODll wbile in jail.

Couture-Rouleau converted in 2013, while Zebaf-Bibeau said, in one version, that his con:version occurred seven yean ago. He was Dised as a Catholic. His

pcrents are divorced. Zehaf-Bibeau's father is at least nominaUy Muslim. He owned a bar and other property in Montteal. The son's Islam appears to be at leut IIODieWhat iDfluc:Dced by Bvtmgelical Christianity. He told people in the homeless shelter where he wu sta� that they should pmy five times a day because we are livillg in the cmd-times. Both mm were 1DDc wolves, DOt affiliated with any group, though the Islamic State wu happy to claim than.

Muslim& in CIUlllda have generally been horrifiecl by the acta of1his pair of converta. Zeba.f-Bibeau cJisruptcd services in the ai-Salaam Ma&qUC in Burnaby, Britiah Columbia, because he did not like die mosque's interfaith outn:acll. They told him to go ellewhere. In Ottawa a group of imams 8.lld other Mualima canied a wreath to the war memorial to expreu condolences for the death of the reaerviat who was shot and killed. One imam pointed out to the reporter from

the Ottawa Citizen that in 2005, 120 Canadian imams issued a declaration CODdemning tmorism.

Beck to Top

Like the United States, Canada has had its share of fanatical killers. In 2012 Richard Henry Bain, an English-speaking Quebecer who feels rqii'CBBed by his

French-speaking counterparts, !!hot and killed a guard at a convention of the separatist Parti Qu&OOois. On June 4, 2014, Justin Bourque, whose views mimlr

1hose of right-wing U.S. SUIVi.valiats, shot five RDyal. Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) officers in Moncton, New Bnmswick, ldlliDg thm: of 1he:m. MwWm.

extremists in Canada have done far less damage than other extremists have.

The actions of 1hese two converts are leading the Conservative government to introduce new anti-terrorist legislation. 1his despite the fact 1hat provisions that

they an: considering already exist as part of an anti-cyberbullying bill. For example, the bill provides for greater cooperation with foreign intelligence

organizations and incrc:aBCd poweni of surveillance. Incidentally, that billllllll bc:cn criticized by the Canadian Bar Association, opposition parties, and the

Clllllldian Privacy Commissioner as being ovc::rly iDIIusive.

There are other kinds of measures that have been proposed to deal with the problem. For example, it bas been argued that there should be a common

command structure for security on Parliament Hill, where there are now four separate security forces. Justice John Major, who headed the Air India bombing

inquiry in 1985, proposed in his report that there ahould be a single national security adviaor. Alex Neve, of Amnesty Jutemational, called for better ovenigbt

of security opemtions, citing the CIIIIC of Canadian Maher Arar, falsely labeled as a militant extremist and 111msfcrrcd from the United States to � in

Syria. Then there was the incident in tm when the RCMP burned down a bam in Quebec because they thought 1hat there was to be a meeting there between

Quebec separatists and members of the U.S. Black Panthers.

In any cue. it is extmnely difficult to stop lone-wolf terrorists before they act. And when Muslim extremists are caught and imprisoned. the Conservative

government is giving their refcmmrtion leas-than-adequate attention. Imam Yuin Dwyer, who was a full-time priiiOD chaplain, developed a program to aid in

rehabilitation. He m�igncd from his position because the government put the chaplaincy aut to competitive bidding.

Justice Minister Peter MacKay is 1Dying with the idea of making it illegal to glorify teJrorism.. Such a law might prove embanassing for his government.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper took a large group of rabbis and others with him on an official visit to Israel One person was a member of the Jewish Defense

League. listed by the U.S. govcmment as a tmorist organization that has promoted murders and attempted murders in the United States. Jn Iarael, Baruch

Goldstein, a member, slaughtered Muslim wonhippen in Hebron. If Jew:ish Defeme League members go to his shrine or in other W8)'ll glorify him, would

they be prosecuted?

In apparmt msction to the k:illiqs, mosques have been varu!alizcd. A man was caught on camma on October 29, 2014, smaahing windows in an OUaWll

mosque. Jn Cold I...ab, Alberta, someone smashed windows and paiDied slogans on the outer wall, telling Muslims to go home. Jn respo.nse, a business owner

in town put a sign in hill window: "Love thy neighbor."

Over the November 8, 2014, wee1rend, there wm: four attacks on Quebec mosques, tbree in and around Quebec City. Someone plastered poaters on the ftont

doors of the three mosques with an inscription that roughly translates, '1slam. aut of my Quebec." They were signed by ''QuCbec ldentitaire," Quebec

Identity. The fourth incident occurred at the Centre Culture! al-I:mane, in Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, the town where Couture-Rouleau drove his car into the

soldiers. Someone threw a rock through a window.

There are other ways than what MacKay proposes to respond to Muslim extremisU. Three Muslim university students in Ottawa are producing a YouTube

program ridiculing the Ialamic State (otherwise known u ISIS). Their program has viewers in Canada and in the Arab world. Then there is the pungent advice

of Wesley Wark, a Canadian expert on intelligence and security: '"''ab: a deep bnlath and practice nmmalcy."

Author: Reuel S. Amdur (http://www.libertymagazine.org/author/reuel-s.-amdur) Reuel Amdur writes from Yal-des-Monts, Quebec, Canada.

D Comnwnta UHrty I A Magaln• of R811glous Frwclom

• Start the discussion ... �

8Loaln �

Be the first to comment.

BatoTop

A MAGAZINE OF RELIGIOUS FREEDOM

LIBfRTY (bllp:/lwww.hllertymapzine.org/)

Navigation

Published in the Nuvember/December 201J (http:/lwww.libertymagfiZine.org/i88IU!Inuvember-december-101J) MagtJZine

by Dan Morris-�ung (http:/lwww.liberlymagazine.org/authorldan-morri8-ymmg)

:.OWL (IIIALT0:11UBJa:JIIOUR C:O.ON IW:EBOOK 1'1lllll1lR CHTTP:ttnlllrTliU:OIIIIHOIE.? GOOGLE+ t' '.IIIE&BODY-HTTP-JIWWWI.IBIRI"YYIIAGAZZE ,. -lacDOOK.COIIIIIIHARERI8HA .........-n>:MMIU.8ERI'tMAGAZINE.ORGII f; F...aiii.UI.QOOQLE.COIIniWIE?

CO-ON-HOIIlE) J mP'JIWWWUBIRniiAGAZitE..DRGfAimCI...IoiOUR- c:o.ION.-JIIEJ o :fii.IIHnP'.IIWWWI.IBIRI"YYIIAGAZZE.ORGUU CO.ON-HOME) COMIIION...OE)

As Pope Francis visited the Ullited States for tho first time---edtkessiDg a joint session of Congress as well as the United Nations duriDg bis September 2.2-27

stay--his recent Dmative on the global enviromnent provided much grist for talking points aDd debate.

Even befure he spoke in the United Stues, however, the pope 88id he hoped his wide-l'llllging tmltise em the inten:onnecticm of ecology, eccmomics, ctimate,

and compassicm might intl.UCIWC the U.N.'s November 30-December 11 Paris ccmfemlc:e on climate chaage.

Ami to keep the topic on the active list for the world's 1.2 billion Catholics, on August 16 the pope dcsigDated September 1 as a new elate on the Catholic

Church calendar, World Day of Prayer for the Care of Creaticm, an event marked by Orthodox Chriatiana' c:almdar for decades.

R.eleued Iune 18, 2015, Lmldato Si ', "C'Dre for Our Cotnltlb1J Home, "baa been ]argely discuaaed on the m.erita of ita uaeummtll of climate change and

environmental degradaticm, ami what can or mould or must be done.

In that �gard, the apmwliDg 184-page teaching tool's theme is straightforward: the planet's health is in peril. humaDkilld is a primary cause, Blld everyone

needs to become awue and involved now.

Writes Pope F:raDcis, .. Doomsday predictions can no longer be met with irony or disdain. We may well be leaving to coming pmemions debris, desolation,

and fi11h. 'Ihe pace of consumpticm, waste, and enviro.Dmental change baa so stzetched the pl.anet's capaoity that 0111' coatemporary lifestyle, liDSUSWDable as it

is. em oaly precipitate catastrophes, such as those which even now periodically occur in di1l'ereD1 areas of the world. 'Ihe effects of the present imbalaDce can

oaly be n:duced by our decisive action, hen: and now."

Beck to Top

However, commentaJy on the high-profile document has increasingly called attention to the encyclical's spiritual themes, notably the intertwined treatment of

natural resources and one another.

"A sense of deep communion with the rest of nature cannot be real if our hearts lack tenderness, compassion, and concern for our fellow human beings,"

declares Francis. ''It is clearly inconsistent to combat trafficking in endangered species while remaining completely indifferent to human trafficking,

unconcerned about the poor, or undertaking to destroy another human being deemed unwanted. This compromises the very meaning of our struggle for the

sake of the environment."

Laudato Si' s impact-now and in the future-is a topic of much conjecture. As a matter of church doctrine, Catholics, of course, are obliged to take

encyclicals seriously. That form is one of the church's most authoritative for doctrinal formulation. Even if a Catholic disagrees with elements or specifics, he

or she is not to ignore the treatise's moral imperative to address environmental distress.

As the pope writes in one of his two poems that conclude Laudato Si', God is to be asked to "bring healing to our lives, that we may protect the world and not

prey on it, that we may sow beauty, not pollution and destruction."

An immediate and ongoing result of the document-which had been anticipated months before its official publication-was a combination of booster shot

and endorsement for disparate environmentalist groups, whether religiously affiliated or not.

For example, commenting on the encyclical, Rabbi Yonatan N eril, director of the Interfaith Center for Sustainable Development, told journalists that world

religions must take leadership roles on environmental questions because the latter involve moral and social elements as much as scientific, governmental, and

economic ones.

Catholic sister Margaret Mayce agrees. Interviewed by National Catholic Reporter, the Dominican nun praised Pope Francis' coalescing of economic,

environmental, social, moral, and institutional aspects of the climate change conversation. Mayce is the nongovernmental organization representative for the

Dominican Leadership Conference at the U.N.

Curiously, Laudato Si' will make both progressive and traditionalist Catholics and some others squirm a little, as it will both liberal and conservative

politicians. While Catholic doctrine affirms the right to private property and the importance of the individual, it also underscores that these are not "absolute

or inviolable," because the riches of creation are meant for all, the pope emphasizes.

Well-known conservative Catholic columnist George Weigel. for example, downplayed the pope's environmental focus and argued that Laudato Si' is

preeminently pro-life.

Catholic Republican presidential hopefuls Jeb Bush and Rick Santorum both provided early sound-bite reactions. Bush said he does not take economic or

political counsel from the pope. Santorum suggested Francis avoid such topics as the environment.

Interestingly, Father Thomas Reese, a Jesuit priest like the pope, argues that if any pope should be taken seriously on issues of science, it is Francis, "whose

initial training prior to entering the seminaJy was as a chemist."

"He never finished his doctorate in theology. He is what academics refer to as ABD, 'all but dissertation,"' points out Reese.

Unlike the two previous pontiff!t-John Paul II and Benedict XVI-Francis "never wrote scholarly books. He was a wide-ranging consumer of theology, not

the proponent of a particular view," Reese notes, adding:

"For John Paul the philosopher and Benedict the theologian, ideas were paramount. But for Francis the scientist and pastor, facts really matter. For John Paul

and Benedict, if reality does not reflect the ideal, then reality must change, whereas for Francis, if facts and theory clash, he, like a good scientist, is willing to

question the theory."

Typically, encyclicals are written with bishops as the primary audience. Laudato Si ', however, in style and scope, is clearly aimed at a world audience. And

one of the aspects that could contribute to a lasting impact is not only on the cogency of the topic, but its readability. The language is at times blunt, at times

poetic, but consistently clear. One need not be a theologian, Scripture scholar, political analyst, canon lawyer or church historian to decipher it.

For example, writes Francis in his opening: '"Laudato Si ', mi' Signore"'-'Praise be to you, my Lord.' In the words of this beautiful canticle, Saint Francis of

Assisi reminds us that our common home is like a sister with whom we share our life and a beautiful mother who opens her arms to embrace us. 'Praise be to

you, my Lord. through our Sister, Mother Earth, who sustains and governs us, and who produces various fruit with coloured flowers and herbs.' This sister

now cries out to us because of the harm we have inflicted on her by our irresponsible use and abuse of the goods with which God has endowed her. We have

come to see ourselves as her lords and masters, entitled to plunder her at will."

It is common to find praise for the document similar to that from avowed "thoroughgoing nonbeliever'' blogger Rob Tiller: ''The prose is lucid and emphatic,

with an animating passion. Francis leaves no doubt that he agrees with the scientific consensus that man-made greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide are

responsible for much of the global warming crisis. He states that there is an urgent need to reduce such emissions and develop renewable energy. If he

accomplished nothing more than calling more attention to this issue and inspiring high-level discussion and action, that would be a lot. But Laudato Si' does

more than that, persuasively articulating a powerful ethical vision that calls for reforming both societies and our selves."

Part of the "ethical vision" embedded within Laudato Si' is a call for families and individuals to take a hard look at consumption-driven lifestyles, to simplify

their lives, to seek joy and comfort from nature and service and even rest. He underscores that every individual can do something to help--use nonpolluting

soap, take public transportation, recycle paper, put on a sweater instead of turning up the heat.

''We are speaking of an attitude of the heart, one which approaches life with serene attentiveness, which is capable of being fully present to someone without

thinking of what comes next, which accepts each moment as a gift from God to be lived to the full. Jesus taught us this attitude when he invited us to

contemplate the lilies of the field and the birds of the air," writes Francis.

In the same vein, Francis encourages families to reembrace or return to the practice of saying grace at meals: "I ask all believers to return to this beautiful and

meaningful custom. That moment of blessing, however brief, reminds us of our dependence on God for life; it strengthens our feeling of gratitude for the gifts

of creation; it acknowledges those who by their labors provide us with these goods; and it reaffirms our solidarity with those in greatest need."

Francis' call to simplicity echoes his often-repeated encouragement for families to make time for themselves and their communities, especially carving out a

day for rest.

While individuals can and must address environmental issues, governments and major institutions must do the heavy lifting, aigUCS the encyclical.

"Francis saves his harshest words for economic interests who 'accept every advance in technology with a view to profit, without concern for its potentially

negative impact on human beings,"' writes analyst Reese. "They show 'no interest in more balanced levels of production, a better distribution of wealth.

concern for the environment and the rights of future generations. Their behavior shows that for them maximizing profits is enough."'

"In Francis' mind," concludes Reese and others, "this is the cause of our current economic and environmental crisis. What is needed is a broader vision where

'technology is directed primarily to resolving people's concrete problems, truly helping them live with more dignity and less suffering. Technology must

serve humanity, not the market.'"

"Nobody is suggesting a return to the Stone Age," the pope affirms, "but we do need to slow down and look at reality in a different way, to appropriate the

positive and sustainable progress which has been made, but also to recover the values and the great goals swept away by our unrestrained delusions of

grandeur."

Editorial note: This article was written after the release of the encyclical but before Pope Francis' September visit, which included addresses to the U.S.

Congress and the United Nations. We at Liberty and all who value the resources our Creator has given us applaud the document and that part of it that

represents a "nonpartisan" respect for the environment. However, I note the injection of a holy day into the discussion. Here the pope becomes partisan, as the

text itself acknowledges: God's people in the Old Testament were indeed commanded to honor the seventh day as a memorial of creation, and by inference as

an act of respect for the created world itself. However, the pope's encyclical goes a step further in transferring this to Sunday worship-a self-proclaimed

memorial of Christ's resurrection but without any biblical license whatsoever. This of course goes to the issue of the Protestant Reformation and whether

authority is found in Scripture alone or in the dictates of a religious entity that has assumed superior authority. All this of course would be merely theological

narrative and not a religious liberty concern were it not for the manner in which this document is being put before the world--on a political stage and with the

political authority of the Vatican ministate. In addressing the issue of global warming and the environment in general, this pope and his predecessor present a

package deal and then in the document Caritas in Veritascall for a global authority with ''the power to act and to enforce." With a religious viewpoint at play,

such a dynamic will result in instant persecution for some and instant political establishment of a particular religious assumption.

Author: Dan Morris-Young (http://www.libertymagazine.org/author/dan-morris­young) Dan Morris .. .Young is the west coast correspondent for the National Catholic Reporter and has written extensively on developments surrounding Catholic

identity issues in the San fFancisco Bay Area.

A MAGAZINE OF RELIGIOUS FREEDOM

LIBfRTY (bllp:/lwww.hllertymapzine.org/)

Navigation

Published in the Nuvember/December 201J (http:/lwww.libertymagfiZine.org/i88IU!Inuvember-december-101J) MagtJZine

by MIITtin Surridge {htlp:/lwww.libenymfJgazine.org/authorl!tuutiiHW'ridge)

EIMIL (IIIALT0:11UBJE.CJ-ntOU IW:EBOOK 1'1lllll1lR CHTTP:ttnlllrTliU:OIIIIHOIE.? GOOGLE+ #, tai'UOD�IIWWWL8EitTYIIMAZI� ,. -�K.COIIIIIIHARERI8HA .........-n>:IIWWWL8EitTYIIMAZINE.ORGII f;.IWU £& UI.QOOQLE.COIIniWIE?

IIIAYEIIT) J mP'JIWWWUBIRniiAGAZitE..DRGfAimCI...IoiJHOU- IIA'ti!ST} o :fii.IIHnP'..IMWIIIII.IBIRniiAGAZitE.ORGUU

IMlDI) IIA'tlill)

It couldn't have been easy growiDg up as the son of literary giant John Steiobeck. perticularly for the child who shared his father's ume. Despite John

Steinbeck IV foJging an impressive path as a writer on his own merits--after bema drafted inlo the Viet:Dam War, he worked as a joumalist and war

ccme11pondeat, later writiDg about his own jOUIDC)'& with the Dalai I...ama--dJc second son of Calif'omia's great novelist couldn't escape his father's shadow or

hill debili.tUing genes. In a propoaal for a book of hill own, 1be younger Steinbeck wrote: "Perhaps it is loDg put time when I ahould have expreaaed many of

the feelillgs that tug at me due to the special circumatancee of being my father's 1011 • • • • I have been challenged to puzzle out my own fate with a large degree

of poetic iuight." "I inherited two life-threatenillg diseases from my parent8. Due to hemochromatosis, a gen.etie iron �tetrtion disease, llld aleoholism, I

developed cirrhosis by the time I was thirty-four.''1

Jolm Steinbeek pasaed down to his son the same traits that defilled Edgar Allan Poe, F. Scott Fi�d, and so many of the great American writers: an

addietion to alcohol and the courage to express pain in words.

John SteiDbcck ocwpies a prestigious place m the litemry amon. His claasie wotb, such as Of Krce and Men, Cannery R� aod The &d Po101, are beloved

by critics, book clubs, aDd educators alilcc. The Gnrpu ofWralh, his most celebrated book, ia a gawine contcoder for the title of Cheat Amerieau Novel: its

story of Dust Bowl farmmlleaving Oklahoma for Califomia awoke the aocial comciem:e of the United S1ates, aa � em:ountered how the fieticmal Joad

family faces numerow11 illjustices in the cm:hards of the Gn:at Depression. It was a nmawsy best seller 8lld remains so, but nearly as maay � have hated

StciDbeek's worb as those who have adored 1bem. In schools across the eoUDtry Letmie and George in Of Mrce and Men attnct concern for their vulgarity,

violeDce. and blasphemy, arul most infamously, erowds bumed The Gnrpu of Wrath in publie bollfires shortly after its release, in SteiDbeek's Califomia

hometown of Sa1iDas no las. For his portrayal of unfair working coaditiODS in The Grtlpes ofWrruA, �aetionary readers called Steinbeck a Comm••Dist. and

objected to his labor sympatbies 8lld eritique ofhllldowners. Beck to Top

It is through this prism that most readers interpret the literature of John Steinbeck: stories of the privileged and powerful abusing the underdogs of society.

Even a cursory glance at The Pearl and its impoverished villagers diving deep into the ocean to make their living, or the Hispanic families in 1brtilla Flat,

shows how Steinbeck included passionate political appeals to help the poor and the outcast. Within his portfolio of societal concerns, though, religious liberty

did not often rank as a high priority. Unlike the literature of other great American masters-Nathaniel Hawthorne assailing the nation's Puritan heritage, Mark

'1\vain satirizing Christian foolishness, or Haniet Beecher Stowe calling upon congregations to end slavery-Steinbeck did not direct his political literature

and n:formist message at the nation's churches. But this is not to say that Steinbeck did not write great n:ligious literatun:.

To focus only on Steinbeck's political message and ignore his striking Christian symbolism is to ignore what makes so much ofhis writing timeless and

universal. In his stories the calls for social justice are loud and frequent, but so are the biblical allegories. His masterpiece The Grapes of Wrath, for instance,

is an "odyssey of a people to the promised land (of California), finding trails, deserts, and crises of their faith along the way . . . . The theme of Cannery Row,

of Doc's fiiends preparing a SUiprise party to welcome him home, echoes the parable of the prodigal son. Of Mice and Men deliberately n:calls the story of

David and Jonathan, that other biblical tale of two inseparable men whose fiiendship ends in death."2 It is within the author's magnum opus that these

n:ligious themes shine the brightest. In East of Eden readers wrestle with such questions as "Am I destined to n:peat the sins of our fathers?" "How can we

break free from the cycle of sinT' and "What is the biblical source of our h'berty and free willr'

In the journal he wrote alongside his epic novel Steinbeck said of East of Eden, "This is my big book. And it has to be a big book, and because it is new in

form although old in pace it has to be excellent in every detail. "3 With East of Eden Steinbeck set lofty goals, and while it had its critics, most readers found

and continue to agree that he succeeded. The multigenerational family saga. vibrantly n:imagines the initial chapters of Genesis, recording the biblical struggle

between good and evil in the agricultural microcosm of early-twentieth-century California.

Within East of Eden Steinbeck most closely examines the relationship between the warring

sons of Adam and Eve, and uses their tale to reveal his greatest argument of all: that within

each of us is a divinely placed opportunity to reject sin. He wrote the ftamework of the

novel's ''roots from that powerful, profound and perplexing story in Genesis of Cain and

Abel This story with its implications has made a deeper mark in people than any other save

possibly the story of the tree oflife and original sin.'o4 Steinbeck tackles humanity's ability

to overcome that sin within the pages of East of Eden, and he argues that the most important

battlefield in the fight between good and evil occurs in man's heart and mind. The story is so

much more than a. simplistic allegory. Steinbeck wrote in his journal that if it ''were just a.

discussion ofbiblical lon:, I would throw it out, but it is not. It is using the biblical story as

the measure of ourselves. "5 Through its elucidation of Hebrew Scripture and poignant

storytelling, East of Eden presents its case that freedom of conscience is not a n:cent

political Creation, but has been with us since creation and is our greatest divinely granted

attribute.

In other words, while other American authors may have tackled religious h'berty directly,

John Steinbeck in East of Eden demonstrates that n:ligion can be the source of that liberty, and it all goes back to the very beginning.

If it weren't already apparent that Steinbeck's work hinged around an understanding of free will, one needs only to look at his personal life to see such self­

detennination. In his early years he forged a path that had others convinced he would be either famous or infamous. His mother, Olive, "pushed him to join

church organizations, but he wasn't very willing, and sometimes he would defy her and shout back. She often said that he would either go to the White House

as president or go to jail."

''He played throughout his writing life with the Christian notion of 'fallen man. •»6 It is likely that he saw in himself many of the same religious failings as his

paternal grandfather, John Adolph Grossteinbeck, a Lutheran cabinetmaker from Germany whose missionary attempt to convert Jews in Palestine ended in

humiliation, violence, and the death of a brother-in-law. Despite those tragic tales, his "adventurous streak was greatly admired by his grandson John

Steinbeck, who liked to work with a portrait of the fienle-look:ing John Adolph nearby. "7 His matemal grandfather, Samuel Hamilton, from Ballykelly in the

north oflrelan.d, was also important for the author. As a. figure of guidance and determination, he features prominently in East of Eden, which Steinbeck

initially created "as a straightforward attempt to remember his past quite literally, to invoke the history ofhis family, and it tells us a lot about Steinbeck's

sense of his own origins."8

Christianity was an important part of John's family history and upbringing. From a young age and continuing throughout his life, "Steinbeck counted the

Bible among his favorite books." As a result some of his work has a sense of subtlety and youthful simplicity in its biblical allegories: " The Red Pony

achieves a brilliant n:writing of the first two chapters of Genesis from the perspective of a child, but the task is so delicately carried off that the n:aders are

scarcely expected to notice it.•o!l East of Eden, however, is much man: adult in nature and overt in allegory. Back to Top

Like many ofhis other works, East of &len attracted attention from cultural conservatives who objected to the violence and sexual misconduct perpetrated by

its antagonist, Cathy Ames. The biblical allusions within her story have been well documented: Cathy frames two boys for rape, manipulates an admirer into

committing suicide, "incinerates her pments, beds down with her brother-in-law, shoots her husband, and abandons her children. Eve and Tamar and Delilah

and Jezebel are rolled into one."10

Most Steinbeck scholars maintain that the author's marriage to his second wife, Gwyndolyn Conger, with whom Steinbeck had two sons, was the inspiration

for his creation of Cathy, East of Eden :S ''monster." Not even the most critical of biographers could claim that Gwyn was quite like the fictional Cathy, yet one

can see how Gwyn's treatment of Steinbeck caused him to grow deeply resentful. According to Jay Parini, she was unfaithful in their marriage, jealous ofhis

success, greedy in the divorce settlement, and petty in withholding access to their sons. In Steinbeck's mind, "Cathy seemed to embody evil almost arbitrarily,

much like Gwyn. She is the sinful wife who cannot curl> her sexual instincts.''11

Weaving personal experience and fiction together with parts of his own family history, Steinbeck reveals the fuctua1 Hamiltons and creates the imaginary

Trasks, producing a story of favorite children and SJbling rivalries occuniDg over many decades of conflict and disappointment. He was so cmgrossed in the

writing of the novel that, for a while, East of Etkn replaced alcohol in his affectioll&-ll dependency he had developed to cope with the harsh reviews from the

critics.

With the wise Chinese housekeeper Lee and the righteous Hamiltons largely playing foil to the novel's other family dynasty, East of Eden begins with the

sons of Cyrus Trask, a deceitful patriarch who does little to prevent the dysfunctional relationship between his sons Adam and Charles. After each boy gives

their father a gift that echoes those that Cain and Abel offer as sacrifices to God in Genesis, Cyrus shows favoritiSln and initiates the first of two Edenic cycles

within the novel. As the naive Adam falls in love with the villainous Cathy, Charles, the other son of Cyrus, develops a bitter resentment toward his brother

Adam and becomes violent Later chapters follow the sons of Adam and Cathy wondering what exactly went wrong in their family's past to cause such

subsequent unhappiness in their present. This new set of brothers, Caleb and Aron, whose names are yet another reminder of the Genesis account, fight not

only each other but also Caleb's sinful destiny. As Caleb tries to oven:ome his mark of Cain. he, along with Aron and a compassionate girl named Abra, must

deal with the rediscovered existence of their monstrous mother, Cathy, whom Steinbeck called "a total representative of Satan."12

It's a tightly woven plot, and Steinbeck cleverly divides the Trask family by name, with

characters representing the virtuous legacy of Abel starting with the same letter: Adam,

Aron, and Abra. Conversely, he groups the spiritual descendants of the murderous Cain in a

similar way: Cyrus, Charles, Cathy, and Caleb.

As the son of Adam and Cathy, and grandson of Cyrus, Caleb is the most complex and

dynamic character in EaNt of Eden. His is a struggle against inheriting the mark of Cain and

the sins of his immediate ancestors: the lies of his grandfather Cyrus, the envious violence of

his uncle Charles, and most important, the depravity of his mother, Cathy. To give a sense of

the rebellious nature and internal struggle within the character of Caleb, filmmakers cast

James Dean in this role, for the movie version of East of Eden inl955.

As to the outcome of whether Caleb can overcome his destiny of sin, and whether his free

will is sufficient to defeat his tendency toward evil, those interested should read East of

Eden for themselves.

It is important to see just how Steinbeck arrived at a scriptural understanding for the

religious source of our liberty and some of the controversy surrounding it

The entire novel hinges on an interpretation of Genesis 4:7 and the Hebrew word tim.shel, or timshol, which can mean either ''thou shalt'' or in some

translations ''thou mayest," meaning "you can." Since Steinbeck seemed especially interested in the Jewish scholarship, here is the verse from the Complete

Jewish Bible: "Sin is crouching at the door-it wants you, but you can rule over it'' (Genesis 4:7, CJB).13

For Steinbeck, the difference between ''thou shalt" and "thou mayest" was vital From this verse Steinbeck was to draw a clear conclusion that God gives each

of us the choice to fight temptation, and not a demand. The differences in interpretation ''mattered so much to Steinbeck that he had a considerable

correspondence on the subject with his publisher, Pascal Covici. Before Steinbeck used it, Covici claims to have found the translation 'Thou mayest' in the

Manchester version of the Douay-Rheims {1812) translation, based on the Vulgate, but Covici asked Steinbeck to check it, because he saw it may well be one

of the most important misttanslations in the Old Testament."14

Back to Top

Steinbeck wrote to Covici: "The King James says of sin crouching at the door, 'Thou shalt rule over it.' The American Standard says, 'Do thou rule over it.'

Now this new translation says, 'Thou mayest rule over it.' This is the most vital difference. The first two are I, a prophecy and 2, an order, but 3 is the

offering of free will. Here is individual responsibility and the invention of conscience."15

Serving as the lyrical cornerstone for East of Eden, the Hebrew word ti111Shel and one possible corresponding English phrase ''thou mayest" enter the novel

through the wisdom of Lee, the Chinese housekeeper for the Trask family. He guides several characters along a path toward this scriptural understanding, and

reveals the meaning of the phrase in an interaction with the fictional Adam Trask and the historical Samuel Hamilton: ''Now, there are many millions in

their . . . churches who feel the order, 'Do thou,' and throw their weight into obedience. And there are millions more who feel predestination in 'Thou shalt.'

Nothing they may do can interfere with what will be. But 'Thou mayest'! Why, that makes a man great, . . . for in his weakness and his filth and his murder of

his brother he has still the great choice. He can choose his course and fight it through and win."16 In the novel, ti111Shel and ''thou mayesf' C<llltinue to make

revelatory appearances until a deathbed climax at the very end, but even the author of these intricate plotlines couldn't have prophesied just how much these

concepts would impact his own offspring. Like the fictional Adam Trask, and Cyrus Trask before him, as well as the biblical parents Adam and Eve, on

whom he based the characters, Steinbeck had two sons of his own. John Steinbeck IY, the war correspondent and traveling companion of the Dalai Lama,

outlived his father. The author of East of Eden, the moving novel about passing down sins from parents to children, died in 1968 after the damage his

addictions did to his own body, and he would never live to see his son's hemochromatosis diagnosis in 1984, nor his articles on "the genetic aspects of

alcoholism and the toll it takes on loved ones." Had Steinbeck lived that long, no doubt, such revelations would have broken the great author's heart, but

unlike his completed best seller East of Eden, the Steinbeck family story had yet to be finished.

Even though the deck had been stacked against him before he was even born, his son's quest for sobriety was successful. John Steinbeck IV wrote,

"Fortunately, when I truly accepted my powerlessness over my disease, the drama was over, and I could begin to understand the source of some of the

behaviors that had taken over my life.'m

The son of John Steinbeck may have credited Alcoholics Anonymous for his victory. There were probably important friends, family members, and sponsors

who helped him along the way. One can't help thinking, however, that given the opportunity to share the source of his triumph, John Steinbeck IV could have

exclaimed, "Thou mayest."

1 John Steinbeck IV and Nancy Steinbeck, The Other Side of Eden: Life with John Stenbeck, www.nancysteinbeck.com (http://www.nancysteinbeck.com/).

2 Martin Walker, America Reborn; A 1Wentieth-Century Narrative in TWenty-six Lives (New York: Knopf, 2000).

3 John Steinbeck, Journal of a Novel; the East of Eden Letters (New York: VIking, 1969), Mar. 21.

4 Ibid. , May 22.

5 Ibid. , June 17.

6 Jay Parini, John Steinbeck: A Biography (New York: H. Holt, 1995).

7 Ibid 0

8 Ibid .

9 David Wyatt, "Introduction to East of Eden," in John Steinbeck, East of Eden (New York: Penguin, 1992).

10 Ibi d .

11 Ibid .

12 Parini.

13 Texts credited to CJB are from the Complete Jewish Bible. Copyright 1998 by David H. Stem. Published by Jewish New Testament Publication, Inc. All

rights reserved Used by permission.

14 Alec Gilmore, "John Steinbeck," The Expository Tfmes, 112, no. 6 (March 2001): 192-196.

15 John Steinbeck, Journal of a Novel; the East of Eden Letters.

16 John Steinbeck, East of Eden.

17 John Steinbeck lV and Nancy Steinbeck.

Author: Martin Surridge (http://www.libertymagazine.org/author/martin-surridge) Martin Surridge has a background in teaching English. He is an associate editor ofReligiowiLiberty.Tv, an independent news Web site. He writes from

Calhoun. Oeoxgia.

1 Comll*ll: Liberty 1 A Mllgai!W of Rllllglaua FI'Mdam

• Rlalmmand 1!11 Sh•rw

• Join the discussion ... �

11MI Burnhwnl • • year qo

Well wrllten overview and unders1andlng of a literary mastarplace, Martin. Could serve VfMY well as a sort of "Cliff Noles" on "East of Eden!"

"' v • Rej)ly • Share >

Copyright C 2017 North Amrriam Divilli.on of the S�-day Adveatilt <llurch (hltp-Jfwww.lllldadvmlilt.orgl). Liberty e ia a regilltered trademark of the General Ccnference Corporation of Seventh-day AdventiltB 4D (hUp:/fwww.adwlltisl.org/).

Liberty® (ISSN 0024-2055) is publilhecl bimoD1hly by dte North �llllll nm.ion ofdte Seventh«y Adven.lillt Cburdl.

8Laaln ..

SOrt by,._. ..

BatoTop

A MAGAZINE OF RELIGIOUS FREEDOM

LIBfRTY (bllp:/lwww.hllertymapzine.org/)

Navigation

Published in the Nuvember/December 201J (http:/lwww.libertymagfiZine.org/i88IU!Inuvember-december-101J) MagtJZine

by Alan E. Bl'r1Wif8tem {htlp:/lwww.liberlymagtmne.mg!authorlalan-e.-brownatem)

BIAL (IIIAILTO:?liU�EPriDII IW:EBOOK 1'1lllll1lR (HTTP:ttnlllrTliU:OIIIIHOIE.? GOOGLE+ AND r 'I'N:IIWMU'ACIDOOK.COIIIIIIHARERI8HA .........-n>:MMIU.8ERI'tMAGAZINE.ORGII t;.F--.-oGLE.COIIniWIE?

;.GALrTYaBODYtoKTlP..IIWWWI.BERniiAGAZII t U ZLW MAZitE..DRGfAimCI...IoiPBIICEPriONAMI)..REAI.ITY) o :fii.IIHnP'..IMWIIIII.IBIRniiAGAZitE.ORGUU AND.fiEA&Irt) ANP.IUiAUil) AIC.flliAUrt)

The Supreme Court's S-4 ruliDg last momh in ObergefeU v. Hodges, 1 holdiDg tbat state baas on same-sex marriages violated d1e Fourteenth Amendment. was

lllldoubtedly an important constitutional decision. It meant different tbinas Cor cWferent parties. Three of the dis8entiq justices,. 2 along with many CODIIIlCDtaton, noted their grave c:cmcems that Iutice ADthony Kamcdy's majority opiDion will lead to seriou govemmcnt mtem:rau:c with the reliprus h"berty of Americana who believe 88 a matter of�ligioua conviction tbat aame-eex marriages violate God'alaw. Of COUI'IIe, among those who worked to promote marriage equality and the righta of the LGBT community, Obetgefell wu �aaon to celebrate.

It's not tbat easy to isolate and evaluate the effect this decision will have on �ligious liberty. Concemll about conflicts between �ligious fteedom and lawll protecting same-sex couples agaiut discrimination are nothing new. They predate ObetP.foll by a decade. Over cbat time period. � haa been a dramatic eultural and politieal shift m attitudes in favor of same-sex marriage. Demographies stroDgly suggest 1hat support for same-sex marriage will contiDue to increase. To be sure. Obergefell may accelerate cultural and political support for same-sex marriage, but i1s holdiq is hardly responsible Cor this dramatic chaoge iD pcnpcctive.

It is. true, of course, that the dcciaion requires the govemme:ab of all states to m:ogDizc samCM�ex Illll1riages DOW. 'I'hu, today there are � jurisdictions in which �ligioua oppo�ition to �x marriages may generan: legal contlic:ta.3 This change in c:onatituticmal.law, lltaDding alone, may burden IIOlDe �ligious individuals. State employees---such 88 comrty clerlts, for example--may be required to issue mmiage licenses to same-sex couples notwithslanding their

religious objections to doing so.

Much of the disquietude expressed aboUl ObeiFfell � impact on �giOWI h"bcrty, however, does not focus on govemmemt employees. Most of the potential burdeu on religiOWI h"berty identified by courts and commemators mvolve the adoption of staWtes and regulations that prohibit �ri:mination ar,..!:at ==

sex couples by privtde sector professionals, proprietam, employen, buinesses, and religious institutions. The enac1:ma1t of such lawB--tmd the���� Top

grant religious exemptions from them-is a matter of political will, not constitutional law. The real concern of Obergefell � critics is that the Court's opinion

itself may encourage society to be less tolerant of religious opposition to same-sex marriages. If the Court's decision persuades more Americans to believe

that same-sex marriages are both morally acceptable and deserving oflegal respect, arguably there will be less sympathy for granting exemptions to religious

individuals or organizations holding contrary beliefs.

One would think that the first and best place to look to determine the effect of Obergefell on religious liberty is the opinion itself. But a word of caution is

necessary here. Very few Americans actually read Supreme Court opinions-even groundbreaking ones such as Obergefell. They rely on media and

commentary to interpret judicial decisions for them. In the case of Obergefell, many accounts of the case (wrongly) suggest that the decision is grounded on

equality principles and declares that discrimination against gays and lesbians is unconstitutional. If people believe that, this is what the case will be

understood to mean.

In fact, however, the majority opinion in Obergefell does not say that discrimination against gays and lesbians violates the Fourteenth Amendment. Indeed, it

really says very little about equality at all. It certainly does not say that gays and lesbians are a quasi-suspect or suspect class or that classifications based on

sexual orientation should be as rigorously reviewed as racial or gender classifications. Unlike many lower federal court decisions that struck down same-sex

marriage bans, the Obergefell opinion does not discuss conventional equal-protection doctrine at all.

Instead, Obergefell holds that bans on same-sex marriage violate the "substantive due process" right to marry. The focus is on personal liberty, not group

equality. Same-sex marriage bans are unconstitutional because they abridge the fundamental right of privacy and personal autonomy that encompasses the

right to marry. Much of Justice Kennedy's opinion expresses a powerful vision (often in lofty and eloquent language) of the meaning and value of marriage,

and it describes the unavoidable material and dignitary hann couples will experience who are denied that status. There is only the most cursory description of

the history and scope of discrimination directed at gays and lesbians throughout American history.

To the extent that Justice Kennedy talks about equality at all, he discusses equal treatment with regard to the exercise of a fundamental right. Whereas core

equal-protection doctrine focuses on laws directed at who a person is (a woman or an African-American, for example), this due-process/equal-protection

analysis applies only to the right a person exercises.

What does this distinction between liberty and equality rights have to do with the likely impact of Obergefell on religious liberty? To begin with, it means that

this case, important as it is, is limited in its scope. It does not extend beyond the right to marry. Its holding does not require religious individuals or institutions

to alter their conduct toward gays and lesbians or same-sex couples in any other context. Moreover, the role of government with regard to liberty rights has

historically been different than its role when equality rights are at issue. Generally speaking, the government mandate with regard to liberty rights is one of

noninterference. Government should keep its hands to itself and leave the exercise of fundamental rights to private decision-making and ordering. Equality

rights are different. Here, government is already involved in regulating or providing benefits to private activities and must restructure what it is doing to

achieve constitutionally required equality. Put simply, the government is more likely to interfere in private affairs when it attempts to further equality

principles. It is no accident that the case that fuels the most fear about intrusions into religious liberty, Bob Jones University v. United States,4 involves a

compelling state interest grounded in racial equality, not in the promotion of some personal hberty interest.

Also, in analyzing alleged abridgments of a hberty right, the Court usually focuses on the importance of the right. In equality cases its emphasis is on the

biased motives of the majority in enacting the challenged law. Thus, opponents of same-sex marriage are more likely to have their beliefs impugned and their

interests ignored if bans on same-sex marriage are understood to be manifestations of invidious discrimination that violate equal-protection guarantees rather

than abridgments of personal liberty violating substantive due process. If the danger to religious liberty from Obergefell arises from the message it

communicates about opponents of same-sex marriage, that danger is reduced considerably by the majority's decision to base their analysis on a substantive

due-process foundation.

This distinction is apparent if we compare Justice Kennedy's opinion in Obergefell with his opinion in United States v. Windsor 5 (the case that struck down

DOMA, the Defense of Marriage Act) two years ago. Windsor was more of an equal-protection case. A core component of its analysis was the Court's

determination that the supporters ofDOMA were "motivated by an improper animus or purpose.'>6 The mean-spirited intent of the statuto--to demean and

disparage same-sex couples-was constitutionally impermissible and required its invalidation. Kennedy's language is starkly different in Obergefell. Here,

Kennedy writes that the belief underlying opposition to same-sex marriage "has been held-and continues to be held-in good faith by reasonable and

sincere people here and throughout the world.''7

It is also useful to read Obergefell together with LUlling v. Virginia, 8 the 1967 case striking down bans on interracial marriages. Loving is primarily a

conventional equal-protection, race-discrimination case. The Court describes Vtrginia's anti-miscegenation law as a racial classification, "odious to a free

people.'19 The reasons for adopting the law were "obviously an endorsement of the doctrine of White Supremacy.''10 The law had no purpose other than

"invidious racial discrimination.''11 In Obergefell, by comparison, Kennedy writes that ''many who deem same-sex marriage to be wrong reach that

conclusion based on decent and honorable religious or philosophical premises, and neither they nor their beliefs are disparaged here."12 It is inconceivable

that anyone on the Court would use such language to describe the racist beliefs condemned in Loving.

SUiprisingly, the dissenting justices in Obergefell reject the hand of mutual respect that Kennedy extends to opponents of same-sex marriage. They insist that

bis opinion is disparaging of opponents of same-sex maniage and that it will be used aggressively to deny religious liberty to anyone seeking an

accommodation of their religious beliefS. Justice Kennedy's respectful language is allegedly nullified13 by bis statement that when sincere personal opposition

to sam<>-6ex marriage is enacted into law, it places the imprimatur of the state on an exclusionary policy that necessarily "demeans or stigmatizes those whose

. • . liberty is denied." 14

Recognizing that the effect of a law may be stigmatizing or demeaning, however, does not mean that the law was intended to have that effect. This idea is

subtle, but it is important Sometimes proponents of a law focus so much on the law's benefits that they fail to accurately appreciate its harm or costs to third

parties. That is different than anim.U&---Where the purpose of the law is to inflict harm on a despised group. Similarly, a commitment to sacred and traditional

understandings of a social institution may reflect primarily reverence for the role that understanding plays in a complex theology or worldview. It is possible

to respect adherents of that understanding wbile acknowledging the problematic consequences that result from enacting it into law.

Justice Kennedy's analysis here focuses on the difference between private belief and state action. Beliefs may be benign when they are accepted by, and

limited to, individuals and private communal institutions, but have very different meaning and consequences when they are codified into law. A religious

community that will not sanctify a same-sex maniage in its house of worship is fundamentally diffenmt than a state that will not recognize a same-sex

marriage anywhere.

Indeed, this distinction is intrinsic to religious pluralism in the United States. Most religions

are exclusionary to some extent. That is accepted as a matter of private belief. Members of

minority faiths do not feel demeaned because larger religions consider minority beliefS to be

erroneous and will exclude adherents of such beliefs from membership in the majority's

church. The analysis changes once the state becomes involved, however. If the state adopts

the tenets of larger faiths, proclaims the beliefS of minority faiths to be in error, and denies

members of minority religions access to the privileges of citizenship available to the

majority, the government's actions will be understood very differently. When it is the state

that denies the validity of the minority's beliefs and it is public opportunities that are being

denied to the minority's members, the government's actions can be accurately described for

constitutional purposes as demeaning and stigmatizing.

In brief, I consider Justice Kennedy's opinion in Obergefell to be a limited decision following the historic decision.

vindicating the right of same-6ex couples to marry. There is nothing about its tone or substance that suggests that it should serve as a clarion call to ignore and

trample over the interests of religious individuals and institutions who oppose same-sex marriage. There is some troubling language near the end of the

opinion, language that seems to imply as a constitutional matter that there is nothing special about religious exercise that justifies special accommodations for

religious persons or institutions. 15 This brief passage hardly suggests that discretionary accommodations are unwise or unnecessary or that they will be

rejected by the political branches of government.

However, even if Obergefell is read as a limited decision, religious liberty conflicts relating to same-sex marriage are certainly going to arise. It is important

to reiterate, however, that most of these conflicts depend on the adoption of statutes and regulations prohibiting discrimination against gays and lesbians or

same-sex couples in the workplace or places of public accommodation. No federal statute provides such protection today. Twenty-eight states provide no civil

rights protection for gays and lesbians either. Obergefell does not alter this civil rights landscape. Nor do I see any indication of political will to tamper with

the tax exemptions of religious institutions in the foreseeable future. The Bob Jones case, which upheld the denial of a federal tax exemption to a religious

university, involved racial discrimination, not the abridgment of a liberty right. For the foreseeable future, the gap between Obergefell and Bob Jones is far

too wide to be the basis of serious worry.

Indeed, readers concerned about Obergefell :V consequences might examine Justice Kennedy's opinion to see if its analysis and language can be used to

support the protection of religious liberty affirmatively. Justice Kennedy writes with some eloquence about the nature of marriage, personal autonomy, and

human dignity. He notes the nobility and dignity ofmarriage.16 He describes how the bond of marriage enables "expression, intimacy, and spirituality."17

Kennedy argues that the h"berty the Constitution protects includes "personal choices central to individual dignity and autonomy . . . that define personal

identity and beliefs."lS And he movingly acknowledges "the universal fear that a lonely person might call out only to find no one there." 19

For the most part, the dissenting justices disparage and ridicule these sentiments about human dignity, nobility, and autonomy. Their error in doing so is

palpable. Defenders of religious liberty should embrace these core principles and insist that they apply as meaningfully and forcefully to individuals seeking

to adhere to their religious beliefS, identity, and community as they do to individuals joining together in marriage. An individual's decision to accept the duties

that arise out bis or her relationship to God is central to human dignity and defines that person's identity. Membership in a religious community enables

"expression, intimacy, and spirituality'' in ways that may transcend what an individual can do alone. Faith and religion respond to the ''the univerr,;! f::::t' �

we may call out in need and receive no response. Back to Top

Obergefell c:onfums that same-sex IIllllriagcs are lawful throughout the United States. That reality is not going to change. Religious individuals and

communities should consider the possibility that the best way to defend religious liberty when it conflicts with laws protecting same-sex couples from

discrimination may be to aigUC that the principles and values supporting state recognition of same-sex marriage apply with equal force to the accommodation

of religious liberty.

1 Obergefell v. Hodges , slip opinion, June 26, 2015.

2 Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Clarence Thomas and Justice Samuel Alito.

3 It is worth noting that conflicts between religious believers and anti- discrimination laws protecting same-sex couples may occur even in states that do not

recognize same-sex marriages. In Elane Photography, LLC v. Willock, 309 P. 3d 53 (New Mexico, 2013) , a wedding photographer was found to have violated

New Mexico's civil rights law prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in places of public accommodation because she refused to provide

her professional services at a lesbian couple's commitment ceremony. New Mexico did not recognize same-sex marriages when this suit was adjudicated.

4461 u.s. 574 (1983).

s 133 S. Ct. 2676 (2013).

6lbid., p. 2693.

7 Obergefell , p. 4.

8388 u.s. 1 (1967).

9lbid., p. 11.

10 Ibid., p. 7.

11lbid., p. 11 .

12 Oberge.fell, p. 19.

l3 See, e.g. (Roberts, C.J., dissenting).

140bergefell., p. 19.

IS Ibid., p. 27.

16Jbid., p. 3.

17 Ibid., p. 13.

18lbid., p. 12.

19 Ibid., p. 14.

Author: Alan E. Brownstein (http://www.libertymagazine.org/author/alan-e.­brownstein) Alan E. Brownstein, a nationally recognized Constitutional Law scholar, teaches Constitutional Law, Law and Religion, and Torts at UC Davis School of

Law. While the primaJy focus of his scholarship relates to church-state issues and free exercise and establishment clause doctrine, he has also written

extensively on freedom of speech, privacy and autonomy rights, and other constitutional law subjects. His articles have been published in numerous academic

journals, including the Stanford Law Review, Cornell Law Review, UCLA Law Review and ConstitutionalCommentary. In 2008, Liberty was privileged to

recognize Professor Brownstein for his passion and dedication to religious freedom at its annual Religious Liberty Dinner in Washington, D.C.