I hope yesterday's post was clear (if you have not read it, please read it before going further on today's post). If it is obvious that there are challenges in reconciling some parts of the American Bill of Rights with the written word of God, then we can take another step in this examination. Does the Bible really endorse freedom of religion? No. Simply consider the first commandment. Thou shalt have no other gods before Me. Pretty simple, right? There is only one God, and we are not allowed to worship anyone or anything as though it were God. That does not truly fit with the concept of freedom of religion. Now, if the definition of freedom of religion were freedom to practice the Catholic faith in any manner approved by the Church, then yes, that fits with the first commandment. Yet, to fight for someone's freedom to worship an idol (remember the rest of the first commandment: thou shalt not make any idols!) does not exactly fit with what our Lord has commanded. How could anyone whose faith is not totally compromised say that God says we should be free to be buddhist, muslim, or Catholic? Yes, anyone is free in their own mind to choose to deny the truths of God, but should we support them in doing so? There is not a single word of Scripture that leans in that direction. Yes, it does tell us that we are all free to make our choices, but that does not mean that we should be granted freedom in a godly nation to choose to hate God. For many Americans freedom of religion equates to freedom from religion and they decide to practice self-worship. Consider the practice of ancient Judaism before the time of Christ. If we examine the Scriptures of the Old Testament, we will find that pagans were allowed to come into Israel, and were not required to convert and become Jews. They were allowed to live, to buy, to sell, and carry on a regular life. They were not, however, allowed to practice pagan religion within the boundaries of the Jewish nation. Pagans were not persecuted for their religious beliefs, but they were also not allowed to encourage others to follow them in their errors. That certainly does not sound like freedom of religion. It is funny how often we hear Church officials saying that we need to fight for freedom of religion so that Catholics can practice their faith throughout the world. It is as though they presume we are to promote a secular government (like that is suddenly a holy thing!). Yes, we as Catholics want to be free from persecution, but sometimes we need some persecution to stay true to the faith. Do we realize, however, that a genuine freedom of religion means freedom to lead people astray and bring them to the depths of Hell? To say that someone can make their own choices and choose to reject Christ and His salvation, is not the same as creating a law that ensures that they can do so. In a truly Catholic country, neither paganism nor heathenism would be allowed to be practiced. Yes, a person might have those beliefs, and that person should not be punished for it (presuming he was not trying to undermine the Catholic faith). Yet, to say that a Catholic (or even merely generic Christian) nation should allow freedom of religion, or worse, to say that individual Catholics should support a law that says that all religious practices are equal and that the true Catholic faith should not have priority in any way at all; well, to say it mildly, that is immoral. (a few final words tomorrow)