Watching China's persecution should cause us to protect religious freedom in the U.S.A.

George Weigel's incisive commentary in the Washington Post, on the secret pact between the Vatican and China makes the case for unwavering resolve in protecting religious freedom against the powers opposing it--in this case, the Communist Party of China. In the U.S., the opposing power frequently is a formidable coalition of abortion rights groups, corporation heads, LGBT activists, entertainment moguls and academics.

Why should the nonreligious care about religious freedom?

 

The Vatican's Faustian secret compact with China and the scandalous silence of Pope Francis regarding the plight of several Catholics who by contrast courageously stand against the tyrannical Chinese Communist Party raises a fair question: If religious organizations kowtow to tyrants at the peril of religious freedom, why should the nonreligious even care?

We should all care about religious freedom because at its heart is our freedom to believe and behave according to our deepest held beliefs. Every one of us depends upon that freedom to live our lives according to our conscientious principles.

America's First Amendment by no accident pairs religious freedom with freedoms of speech, the press, assembly and petitioning the government. That's because once a government intrudes on any one of these freedoms, none of the other freedoms remains safe. Witness China.

The Chinese Communist Party's jackbooted stomping on freedoms of speech, assembly, the press and religion should give us pause before sanctioning any weakening of these freedoms in our own country—even when such suppression might advance our own convictions regarding abortion, marriage, gender issues or any other matter of belief and conscience.

As Martin Luther King, Jr. reminds us, "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."

HHS addresses "transgender mandate" in new rule … but Supreme Court redefines "sex discrimination"

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced on June 12 that it had "finalized a rule under Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) that maintains vigorous enforcement of federal civil rights laws on the basis of race, color, national origin, disability, age, and sex, and restores the rule of law by revising certain provisions that go beyond the plain meaning of the law as enacted by Congress."

CMA and Becket express optimism

The Christian Medical Association (CMA) expressed optimism that the new HHS rule, which was influenced by a CMA court case and buttressed by CMA polling, will help protect medical judgment and the exercise of conscience in healthcare.

"Health professionals know they must base medical decisions on biology and science, not ideology," said Dr. Jeff Barrows, CMA's Executive Vice President for Bioethics and Public Policy and an Ob-Gyn physician. "Biological gender carries very significant health implications that a physician must be able to recognize in making treatment decisions. The freedom for a health professional to base decisions on the medical science regarding biological gender also carries conscience concerns that should not be overruled by politics or ideology.

"We are hopeful that this rule will help steer consideration of gender issues in healthcare back toward science and away from politics and ideology, back to the protection of professional medical judgment and the freedom to adhere to long-observed ethical and moral standards."

Luke Goodrich, vice president and senior counsel at Becket—the firm that represents CMA in its case against the 'transgender mandate--added, “No doctor should be forced to perform a procedure she believes would harm a patient. The new rule will help ensure that all patients receive top-notch care without forcing doctors to perform potentially harmful procedures in violation of their religious beliefs and medical judgment."

CMA lawsuit and polling influenced new HHS rule

The new HHS rule was influenced by a successful and ongoing CMA and Franciscan Alliance lawsuit aimed at stopping the previous administration's "transgender mandate" that had trampled medical judgment and nixed conscience objections over transgender procedures and prescriptions. The old rule had interpreted "sex discrimination" under Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) to include not just biological sex but also termination of pregnancy and gender identity, which the old rule defined as “one’s internal sense of gender, which may be male, female, neither, or a combination of male and female.”

As Roger Severino, Director of the Office for Civil Rights at HHS, explained in announcing the new final rule, "HHS will continue to vigorously enforce federal civil rights laws prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, disability, age, and sex in healthcare, as Section 1557 provides. HHS respects the dignity of every human being, and as we have shown in our response to the pandemic, we vigorously protect and enforce the civil rights of all to the fullest extent permitted by our laws as passed by Congress. We are unwavering in our commitment to enforcing civil rights in healthcare."

In its announcement, HHS highlighted the impact that CMA's successful lawsuit had on the rules, noting, "On December 31, 2016, a federal court preliminarily enjoined, on a nationwide basis the prior administration’s attempt to redefine sex discrimination in the 2016 Rule, concluding that the provisions were likely contrary to applicable civil rights law, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, and the Administrative Procedure Act."

HHS also cited as rationale for its new rule CMA's national polling of faith-based health professionals that had been submitted to HHS during the public comment period on the proposed rule.

HHS observed that CMA "commenters, however, cited a survey showing that 97% of responding faith-based medical professionals attest that they 'care for all patients in need, regardless of sexual orientation, gender identification, or family makeup, with sensitivity and compassion, even when [they] cannot validate their choices.' Thus, some commenters argue, the issue is not one of refusing to care for certain patients based on identity, but instead a matter of declining to participate in a discrete set of morally controversial procedures and treatments that are available elsewhere."

CMA's polling also found that 91% said they would stop practicing medicine apart from conscience protection.

Supreme Court redefines "sex discrimination"

While the HHS final rule highlighted the common understanding of the term "sex" as referring to biological male or female, the Supreme Court just a week later issued a decision reinterpreting "sex discrimination" in employment to include discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

According to the majority opinion, authored by Justice Gorsuch, if any employer “fires an individual for being homosexual or transgender,” then the employer has fired that person “for traits or actions it would not have questioned in members of a different sex.” Thus, the employer has engaged in “sex discrimination” in violation of federal law.

In his dissenting opinion, Justice Alito warned that the ruling “is virtually certain to have far-reaching consequences.” In particular, Justice Alito noted that “[h]ealthcare benefits may emerge as an intense battleground under the Court’s holding,” because the Affordable Care Act “broadly prohibits sex discrimination in the provision of healthcare.”

One example of that issue is CMA's "transgender mandate" lawsuit. Winning the religious freedom aspect of that case now takes on even greater importance.

As Justice Alito noted, “[S]ome employers and healthcare providers have strong religious objections to sex reassignment procedures, and therefore requiring them to pay for or to perform these procedures will have a severe impact on their ability to honor their deeply held religious beliefs.”

Call to courage and spiritual battle

Clearly some of the foundations of our faith, medical science and reality itself are under attack in the courts and in our legislatures. We know from Scripture that spiritual forces lie behind attacks on God's immutable truth and on the design of His creation.

Ultimately our enemy is not deceived legislators, activists or judges but the false ideas and spiritual forces of deception that have blinded eyes to the truth—truth that can set us free to live according to God's design.

Pray for our country, our courts, our lawmakers and CMDA, that we might all conform our lives to God's truth and follow His perfect path to human fulfillment and justice.

Related resources:

•  Freedom2Care - CMA's project focused on freedom of faith, conscience and speech
• CMA/Freedom2Care national polling – on conscience and compassionate care
• Final HHS Rule - PDF
• Factsheet on HHS rule - PDF

Responding to anti-Christian animus revealed in the pandemic

The pandemic has revealed much about human nature, sacrificial Christian love and hostility toward followers of Christ.

Activists lobby to banish Christians working to save COVID-19 patients

Samaritan's Purse volunteers risked their lives at their
own expense to save lives in New York City.

In New York City, pronouncements against the volunteer work of the Christian relief group Samaritan's Purse revealed venomous anti-Christian attitudes. Because Samaritan's Purse, led by Franklin Graham, the son of the late evangelist Billy Graham, adheres to a biblical view of marriage, some New Yorkers would have had the group kicked out of the city rather than allowed to help save lives.

According to NBC News, for example, an LGBT activist protestor summed up the sentiment  against the Christian organization by saying, "How was this group ever considered to bring their hatred and their vitriol into our city at a time of crisis when our people are fighting a pandemic?” According to the New York Times, "the Democratic speaker of New York’s City Council urged Samaritan’s Purse to leave the city."

Meanwhile, of course, Samaritan's Purse staff and volunteers risked their lives at their own expense to save the lives of as many New Yorkers as they could. Like virtually all Christian health professionals who participated in national polling by the Christian Medical Association and Freedom2Care, they had committed to "care for all patients regardless of agreement with patients' choices."

Anti-Christian hatred threatens Christian health professionals

A Christian physician who serves in New York City wrote of healthcare colleagues feeling "incensed since day one" and of "enraged emails and faculty meetings that demand 'kicking them out.'" The physician worried that anyone known to associate with Samaritan's Purse staff would be subjected to personal reprisals.

I wrote to this Christian physician:

Thank you for your incredible work and perseverance in the face of tremendous stress. May God bless, strengthen and inspire you and you have inspired us.

It sounds like you are essentially viewing raw human nature apart from God, something akin to what C.S. Lewis paints a picture of in The Great Divorce.

You also seem to be living and experiencing life in a way reminiscent of the early Christians, who shone as lights in pagan darkness and hostility that went beyond words to rocks and lions.

In our times of growing hostility toward the things of God, I suspect He is calling Christian health professionals to make clear decisions along the lines of Daniel, who first “made up his mind that he would not defile himself” (Daniel 1:8) by compromising values under pressure, and with Queen Esther, who finally conquered her fear with faith, determining that “if I perish, I perish” (Esther 4:16).

In other words, if a Christian health professional can stay true to God’s principles by determining beforehand to let it all go and leave career, reputation and future in His hands, then faith can begin to conquer fear and enable one to not only courageously face the hatred of others but to love them as well.

Now, I write this in the comfort of my home while you are facing demanding shifts in the midst of death, so I don’t claim to fully appreciate what you’re facing. But I do think these examples and principles in God’s Word are there for us for just “such a time as this.”

God bless you, protect you and equip you to love as He would. And may He transform the lives of your colleagues.

Government officials discriminate against churches

The pandemic also seems to have provided an invitation, in the minds of some government officials, to restrict believers from meeting while allowing more favored secular groups to meet. The U.S. Department of Justice recently had to weigh in against government officials in Virginia who were penalizing churches while protecting secular businesses and groups for the same activities.

From a U.S. Department of Justice news release:

The Department of Justice today filed a Statement of Interest in a Virginia federal court concerning the First Amendment’s freedom of religion in support of Lighthouse Fellowship Church (Lighthouse), a congregation in Chincoteague Island, Virginia, that serves, among others, recovering drug addicts and former prostitutes.

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Virginia’s governor issued executive orders that ban in-person religious services of more than 10 people while permitting such gatherings of workers in any non-retail business and an array of retail businesses, including liquor stores, dry cleaners and department stores. Violations of the orders allow for criminal charges and carry penalties of up to a year in a jail and a $2,500 fine.

As alleged by Lighthouse, on April 5, 2020, the church held a sixteen-person worship service in its 225-seat sanctuary while maintaining rigorous social-distancing and personal-hygiene protocols. At the end of the service, the Chincoteague police department issued Lighthouse’s pastor a criminal citation and summons, based on the governor’s executive orders.

“For many people of faith, exercising religion is essential, especially during a crisis,” said Assistant Attorney General Eric Dreiband for the Civil Rights Division. “The Commonwealth of Virginia has offered no good reason for refusing to trust congregants who promise to use care in worship in the same way it trusts accountants, lawyers, and other workers to do the same. The U.S. Department of Justice will continue to monitor any infringement of the Constitution and other civil liberties, and we will take additional appropriate action if and when necessary.”

We can seize an opportunity in the midst of attacks

Someone has wisely observed that crises do not form character; they reveal character.

As our nation faces this pandemic crisis, we see not only the raw anti-Christian character of some people laid bare; we see also an opportunity to demonstrate supernatural Christ-like character in response. Easier said than done, I fully realize, but the words of our Lord Jesus Christ can inspire and equip us to overcome evil with good:

“If the world hates you, you know that it has hated Me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, because of this the world hates you. Remember the word that I said to you, ‘A slave is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted Me, they will also persecute you; if they kept My word, they will keep yours also (John 15:18-20).

“But I say to you who hear, love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you (Luke 6:27-28).

But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return; and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High; for He Himself is kind to ungrateful and evil me (Luke 6:35).

Coronavirus Response Reveals Character of Governments

American novelist James Lane Allen wrote, "Adversity does not build character; it reveals it." The response by the governments of countries around the world to the Covid-19 Coronavirus is revealing the fundamental character of those governments.

As the U.S., state and local governments and healthcare professionals labor tirelessly in compassionate and effective efforts to protect American citizens from the spreading Covid-19 Coronavirus, governments in certain countries instead are reportedly exposing persecuted religious groups to the threat.

So charges the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) in a just-released report, "The Global Response to the Coronavirus: Impact on Religious Practice and Religious Freedom."

China demonstrates contempt for religious minorities

China withheld a potentially lifesaving Coronavirus alert.

Chinese Communist officials clearly view religion as a threat to the power of the state. Besides rampant and systematic persecution of individual pastors and believers, the Chinese government literally has dynamited Christian churches. The persecution extends to adherents to virtually any religion besides the state's de facto religion, Communism.

The USCIRF report now notes, "Human rights advocates are concerned that COVID-19 — and the [Chinese] government’s response—risk exacerbating ongoing religious freedom violations. As noted in USCIRF’s 2019 Annual Report, the Chinese government has detained more than 1 million Uighur and other Muslims in concentration camps in Xinjiang since April 2017. The combination of limited access to medical resources and large concentrations of elderly detainees could lead to a humanitarian disaster if the virus reaches any of those camps.

"In addition, there are reports that authorities have forced Uighurs to work in factories throughout the country to compensate for decreased output during the quarantine. In January, authorities quarantined millions of people across Xinjiang without advance warning. There are reports that some Uighur residents in the city of Ghulja have limited access to food and local officials have demanded payments in order to bring supplies."

Iran charged with ignoring risks to religious prisoners

Government officials in Iran, another religion-repressive regime, now are charged with intentionally putting religious minorities at risk.

USCIRF reports, "Iran has long imprisoned hundreds of people who are members of religious minority groups. Activists have expressed concern that prison authorities are not taking sufficient precautions to mitigate the spread of COVID-19, which has already appeared in Evin, Urmia, and Ghazalhesar prisons.

"On March 3, Iran announced it would release 54,000 prisoners on furlough, and it later released a total of 70,000. However, 16 Sufi prisoners at Great Tehran Penitentiary (GTP) reportedly were moved to a ward with known cases of COVID-19, and 8 Sufis from Evin prison were moved to the same ward within GTP. Additionally, eight Sufis in Ghazalhasar Prison were moved to an overcrowded ward at that prison where they are at an increased risk of contracting the virus."

Why American Christians care

Why do Christians in the United States care about the persecution of non-Christians in countries well beyond our borders?

1.      Because religious freedom is a God-given right, we must protect this freedom for all persons.

My friend and colleague Luke Goodrich, an attorney with Becket who has represented the Christian Medical Association in court, explains this right in his book, Free to Believe:

"This understanding is also consistent with how God created us and interacts with us. God never forces anyone to love Him, because forced love is not love at all. And if God doesn’t force anyone to love Him, how much less should the government try to do so?"[i]

"So when the government needlessly interferes in our relationship with God, it is committing an injustice in two respects. First, it’s exceeding its God-given realm of authority and attempting to exercise authority that belongs to God alone. Second, it’s taking away something every human being deserves—an opportunity to respond freely (even if erroneously) to God."[ii]

2.      Because the United States also can lose religious freedom.

The record of other countries and history provide us with a roadmap of how religious freedom can be advanced or restricted.

Consider two revolutions, for example: The French Revolution and the American Revolution. In France, radical secularists guillotined clergy during a merciless purge of religion. China and Iran demonstrate a similar anti-religious, totalitarian character today.

By contrast, after the revolution in America--a country settled by persecuted religious groups--our founders enshrined religious freedom in our Constitution. Though imperfectly implemented through the years, this protection has produced a freedom and prosperity previously unknown in history.

Yet today we face increasing onslaughts in the United States against our historic religious freedom—typically under the guise of eradicating discrimination. For example, the U.S. House Oversight Committee recently held a hearing entitled, "The Administration’s Religious Liberty Assault on LGBT Rights."

But the strong arm of the U.S. government is hardly aimed at oppressing the LGBT community, which arguably has become one of the most culturally celebrated groups in the country. No, government assaults and coercion have been overwhelmingly against persons of faith, who simply decline to comply with demands that compromise their most deeply held convictions. A few examples:

·         Under the vast governmental powers granted by Obamacare, the previous administration attempted to force the Little Sisters of the Poor Catholic nuns to participate in its contraceptives mandate.

·         The U.S. Equal Opportunity Employment Commission during that administration attempted to dictate the hiring practices of Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School.

·         In Colorado, the government prosecuted cake artist Jack Phillips for sexual orientation discrimination simply because he had declined to create a same-sex wedding cake, despite serving LGBT customers otherwise.

·         The Obama Dept. of Health and Human Services gutted the conscience freedom rule that helped protect health professionals from coercion to participate in abortion and other morally controversial procedures.

·         The state of Washington prosecuted flower shop owner Barronelle Stutzman for acting consistent with her faith when she declined to use her creative skills to celebrate the same-sex ceremony of a longtime customer.

The list of government coercion of religious conscientious objectors goes on, with each instance holding a corrosive potential to erode our fundamental religious freedoms. Full-blown government persecution can begin with just such a gradual erosion of religious freedoms. Government incursion into our fundamental freedoms will never advertise itself as a path to persecution. These incursions will always be perpetrated under the guise of something that sounds good--like preventing discrimination, ensuring "reproductive freedom" or protecting health.

So as we ponder this new, invisible enemy, let us pray and work to prevent the literal virus we now face from serving as an international transmitter of government coercion.

Thankfully, a number of outstanding U.S. government officials who are persons of faith are leading the charge for international religious freedom. I have had the privilege of meeting with each of them, even on a regular basis, to discuss programs, developments and strategies.

Please pray for these individuals in our government and the many more in the U.S. and around the globe who are working tirelessly to preserve our God-given freedom to believe:

·         Sam Brownback - Ambassador at Large For International Religious Freedom;

·         Tony Perkins – Chair, U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom;

·         Mike Pompeo – U.S. Secretary of State;

·         Roger Severino - Director, Office for Civil Rights, U.S. Dept. Health and Human Services.

---

[i] Goodrich, Luke. Free to Believe (p. 153). The Crown Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

[ii] Ibid., p. 154.

U.S. advocates at U.N. for international religious freedom

An email received from a friend in the White House summarizes this historic advocacy:

"Today, President Trump became the first President to convene a meeting on religious freedom at the UN. He was surrounded by survivors of religious persecution from around the globe, civil society leaders, religious leaders, US business executives, US administration officials (Secretary Pompeo, Ambassador Brownback, and many others), members of the US Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), and members of the faith community. Over 130 UN Heads of State and Delegations, as well as UN Secretary Gutierrez, attended the event to hear the President address this crucial issue.

As many of you know, there is no better time for a meeting like this one. More than 80 percent of the world’s population live in nations where religious freedom is threatened or banned. We see people being persecuted for their religious beliefs at an alarming rate. Right now in China, one million Muslim Uyghurs are imprisoned simply because of their faith. In Iran, the persecution of Christians, Sunnis, Bahai’i, and Jews continues. And in Burma, the military continues to target Rohingya Muslims and Christians with discrimination and violence.

Houses of worship – sacred places that should never be a place of violence – have seen unspeakable tragedies in the past year. In Sri Lanka, 300 Christians were murdered during Easter services. In New Zealand, 51 men, women, and children were brutally killed while attending mosque. And in Pittsburgh and Poway, faithful Jewish communities faced deadly and cowardly anti-Semitic attacks.  

Around the world, religious prisoners of conscience continue to be imprisoned, detained, and disappear for their religious beliefs. The trend of religious intolerance is rising around the world.

Today, the President used the full weight of the US government and called out on the world’s stage that we must not ignore this frightening trend. Instead, he called for an end to discrimination and persecution of all people, of all faiths. America stands with believers in every country.

For those of you who were not able to watch it live, I have included the text of the President’s remarks from today, the Vice President’s remarks, and the video of the full event. I also included highlights of the President’s speech sent around by the WH Communications Team.

I hope you will consider sharing. And of course, I hope you will join the President and Vice President in their efforts to advance religious freedom around the globe.

Thank you.

“Today, I ask all nations to join us in this urgent moral duty. We ask the governments of the world to honor the eternal right of every person to follow their conscience, live by their faith, and give glory to God.” – President Donald J. Trump 

Religious students and faculty face discriminatory dogma

"Double, double toil and trouble; Fire burn and cauldron bubble."[i]

The cauldron of ideological hostility toward religious principles and people of faith at Yale Law School just boiled over, and its discriminatory policies targeting religious students threaten to ooze throughout academia and beyond. The school's new anti-religious policy illustrates the extent to which some academic institutions—including medical and dental schools--are willing to go to enforce secular dogma.

Law school withdraws aid from students who serve at faith-based ministries

An opinion piece in USA Today outlines Yale Law School's new aid policy that penalizes persons of faith:

"Under the guise of nondiscrimination, Yale Law School has announced it will blatantly discriminate. A student is barred from aid if she works at a synagogue that gives preference to Jewish applicants, but not if she works at an organization that peddles anti-Semitism yet hires all comers. A graduate is blocked from funding if she works for the Christian Legal Society, but not if she works for the Freedom from Religion Foundation. And a graduate is not eligible to receive loan assistance if she is a professor at Brigham Young University, but is eligible if she works for Berkeley."

A Yale Law School student reacted to the new policy:

"We are deeply concerned about what this means for the future of religious and conservative students at Yale. Who will want to attend a law school that limits your professional opportunities because of your religious convictions? Who will trust a school administration that buckles under pressure from an angry mob and throws its religious and conservative students under the bus?"

Yale Law School's academic version of an anti-religious pogrom advances an alarming campus trend of barring believers from benefits accorded to other students.

Medical and dental student groups face ouster

Medical and dental students who adhere to a biblical faith and/or to pro-life convictions face discrimination at schools that otherwise allow student groups to qualify membership based on sex (fraternities and sororities) and on other criteria related to groups' missions, but not on religious faith.

Anecdotal reports from Christian Medical and Dental Associations campus chapters include the following:

·       At the School of Dental Medicine in a private research university in Ohio: For 40 years, CMDA students had participated in a medical-dental school chapter, but dental students were denied the ability to form their own chapter:

“The group has not been approved because of the emphasis on God and especially because of the Bible sessions as written in the proposal you send. [We]…feel that it is not appropriate for us to endorse such activities."

·       At a large Illinois university: Administration officials de-recognized a 30 year-old CMDA chapter. They claimed that the chapter did not “meet the Board of Trustee’s policies regarding non-discrimination” because the chapter’s leaders are held to moral standards. Administrators wrote that because

“…students are not eligible to be leaders of the organization if they do not believe in God…your organization’s registration is denied.”

·       At the School of Dentistry at a midwestern Jesuit university: Government funds were used to build a dental school building, but administrators forbade the CMDA chapter from meeting on campus because they reportedly feared, ironically, legal consequences related to federal non-discrimination laws.

(Author at far right) Lobbying on Capitol Hill
with a BLinC student, campus ministry leaders
and religious freedom attorneys.

Other campus groups have felt the hot hand of anti-religious discrimination on their necks. The Becket law firm reports:

"In October 2017, the University of Iowa targeted Business Leaders in Christ (BLinC) and kicked them off campus because BLinC asks its leaders to share its religious beliefs—even though the university allows other groups to select leaders who share their mission and ideology. Becket is defending BLinC in federal court against the University of Iowa, asking the court to allow BLinC back on campus.

"On February 6, 2019, the court ruled that the university must end its unequal treatment of religious student organizations, and allow BLinC permanently back on campus. In light of continued official statements by the university that its policies would continue to exclude religious student groups, BLinC appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit."

Professors also experience anti-religious targeting

Academic administrators intent on enforcing secular dogma do not limit their targets to religious students; they also train their sights on faith-following faculty.

Psychiatrist and professor Dr. Allan Josephson interviewed on CMDA's Christian Doctors Digest and also spoke at the Heritage Foundation on gender issues—to the outrage of some of his academic colleagues.

Walt Heyer, a man who for years identified as a woman, writes in defense of Professor Josephson after his subsequent forced departure from the University of Louisville:

"Dr. Allan Josephson, the Division Chief of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Psychology at the University of Louisville, has served as a distinguished professor in good standing for fifteen years. He scored perfect marks in 2014, 2015 and 2016 on his university reviews.

"But all of that changed in 2017, when he was quickly demoted. This year, the university did not renew Dr. Josephson’s contract, effectively firing him.

"Why? All because a few of his colleagues disagreed with his views on treatment protocols for gender dysphoria in children.

"I have heard Dr. Josephson speak. He is brilliant and likely would destroy his former colleagues in an intellectual face-to-face debate regarding the effectiveness and consequences of using affirmation, hormones, and surgery as treatment for childhood gender distress.

"Looking back on my life, I only wish Dr. Josephson would have been my doctor during my childhood."

Faith community and government leaders fight back

Reacting to the surge of anti-religious discrimination on campuses and beyond, the faith-based community and key political leaders are moving to protect freedoms of speech and religious exercise on campuses.

On March 21, the President issued an executive order, the key parts of which are as follows:

Sec. 2. Policy. It is the policy of the Federal Government to: (a)encourage institutions to foster environments that promote open, intellectually engaging, and diverse debate, including through compliance with the First Amendment for public institutions and compliance with stated institutional policies regarding freedom of speech for private institutions.

Sec. 3. Improving Free Inquiry on Campus. (a) To advance the policy described in subsection 2(a) of this order, the heads of covered agencies shall, in coordination with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, take appropriate steps, in a manner consistent with applicable law, including the First Amendment, to ensure institutions that receive Federal research or education grants promote free inquiry, including through compliance with all applicable Federal laws, regulations, and policies.

Sec. 6. General Provisions. (b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

While this executive order does not alter existing law or Constitutional provisions, it does send a warning shot across the bow of institutions that have denied students their First Amendment rights of speech, religious exercise or assembly. 

For academic administrators who fear the secular dogmatists but otherwise might be inclined to protect these freedoms, it provides them with "cover" to enforce freedom-protecting policies. For those who are not inclined to protect these freedoms (like school administrators who have discriminated against CMDA campus groups), the executive order should make them think twice about pursuing their discriminatory intentions at the risk of federal funding.

CMDA advocates for religious freedom

Education Secretary Betsy DeVos

Having attended off-the-record meetings with high-level Department of Justice officials and with Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, I can assure readers that the administration views protecting campus religious freedom as a priority concern. Secretary DeVos recently publicly announced that the federal government "will no longer enforce a restriction barring religious organizations from serving as contract providers of equitable services solely due to their religious affiliation."

Buttressing that decision is a landmark Supreme Court case (one of many court cases in which CMDA has participated), Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, Inc. v. Comer (137 S. Ct. 2012 (2017). The Court held in that case that under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, otherwise eligible recipients cannot be disqualified from a public benefit just because of their faith commitments.

At the end of the day, specific laws and the Constitution--and judges' interpretation of those--will determine the freedoms of faith-based student groups. Thankfully, CMDA has built strong relationships over the years with legal groups like Alliance Defending Freedom, Becket, and Christian Legal Society and others that gladly defend our campus groups and your religious freedoms.

Pray, speak out and prepare

What can you do?

Pray for the protection of our nation's historic commitment to religious freedom; elect and support government officials who will enforce protections; and speak out about instances of anti-religious discrimination.

Speaking out about discrimination promotes justice and helps protect others from discrimination. If you know of instances of discrimination against faith-based student groups and/or health professionals, please visit our Freedom2Care discrimination stories website to relate any incidents. (Alternatively, you may forward any stories and related documentation to me at JI@Freedom2Care.org.) We can help evaluate the situation and potential for legal counsel and/or defense.

Might you as a student or professional face backlash for speaking out? Count on it and prepare for it.

"You will be hated by all because of My name…"(Mark 13:13).

As believers preparing to stand firm in our faith convictions in the face of inevitable attacks, we do well to model Daniel, who "made up his mind that he would not defile himself" (Daniel 1:8) and Esther, who vowed, "if I perish, I perish” (Esther 4:16).

We do not know exactly how our tests of faith may come. For an increasing number of believers around the world, a test of faith means a literal gun to the head by an anti-Christian terrorist demanding apostasy, or a radical government edict targeting Christians. Others have faced more subtle yet still profound personal tests of fealty to Christ and His Kingdom principles—in conversations, interviews, patient encounters, investigations and legal actions.

However our tests come, may God grant us grace, courage and faithfulness to always and forever remain true to Christ in all we are and in all we say and do.

"But when they hand you over, do not worry about how or what you are to say; for it will be given you in that hour what you are to say" (Matthew 10:19).

"…but the one who endures to the end, he will be saved"(Mark 13:13).

"I will give to the one who thirsts from the spring of the water of life without cost.  He who overcomes will inherit these things, and I will be his God and he will be My son" (Revelation 21:6-7).

Resources:

Freedom2Care discrimination stories website

Freedom2Care legislative action website

HHS Conscience and Religious Freedom Division

---

[i] Shakespeare's Macbeth (Act IV, Scene I).

Declarations of Faiths in Times of Persecution: What the West Can Learn From Chinese Christians and Dietrich Bonhoeffer

In the United States of America, most battles between our government and our faith take place within courtrooms. However, not all Christians in the world are granted the right to an attorney. In China, under the governance of a communist atheist government, Chinese Christians are facing a type of persecution that most Americans will only ever read about in news articles or watch on tv: churches bulldozed, crosses and pictures forcibly removed from private citizen’s homes, Christians banned from freely gathering.

In response to these injustices, hundreds of Chinese pastors composed and signed a declaration of faith in which they affirm the core tenets of Christianity and condemn their government’s blatant attacks upon their ability to practice their beliefs. The statement reads,

“For the sake of the Gospel, we are prepared to bear all losses—even the loss of our freedom and our lives.”[1]

These powerful words are reminiscent of a similar declaration of faith, signed many years ago by German Christians in response to the horrific deeds committed by Adolf Hitler and his Nazi regime.

In 1934, German theologians and pastors signed the Barmen Declaration in order to declare their allegiance to God before State and the authority of Holy Scripture over National Socialism.

The federation of churches who signed the declaration became known as the Confessing Church; they believed the church in Germany was in a state of “confessing” meaning, a state of crisis in which the “confession of the gospel was at stake.” German Christians had become unwilling to not only publicly profess their faith but authentically live it as well. The Confessing Church was an attempt the wake up their fellow Christians to the reality of Hitler’s evil regime.

One particular individual, at the forefront of this movement, was the German pastor and theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer. Many know Bonhoeffer for his involvement in the many plots to assassinate Adolf Hitler. Ultimately, Dietrich Bonhoeffer was arrested by the Nazis and shortly before the war ended, climbed the steps to the gallows where he took his last breath. The declaration of faith made by Dietrich Bonhoeffer was not just a signed piece of paper but an actualized commitment solidified by his actions and sacrifices.

Bonhoeffer’s story of faith and his fight for freedom involves espionage, assassination attempts, and executions. However, more important than his heroic deeds was the driving force behind them: his personal relationship with Jesus Christ.

Bonhoeffer’s relationship with Christ and understanding of the true essence of Christianity was the ever burning flame which sparked his boldness and fearlessness. For Bonhoeffer, it all boiled down to a willingness to “take Christ seriously.” He wrote,

“Understanding Christ means taking Christ seriously. Understanding this claim means taking seriously his absolute claim on our commitment.”[2] 

During Hitler’s rise to power and even during his reign of terror, the majority of German Christians were unwilling to stand with men like Bonhoeffer. For some time, Christians had been exiling Christ

to their Sunday mornings, excluding Him from the rest of their day to day lives. This greatly frustrated Dietrich Bonhoeffer; he believed that the Christian life requires a full and unreserved commitment of oneself. The choice was simple: give Christ everything, or give Him nothing. 

To give oneself to Christ entails choosing Christ in the present moment and serving His kingdom here on earth. Bonhoeffer preached,

“If you want to find eternity, you must serve the times.” [3]

For many of his fellow Germans, Bonheoffer was demanding too much of them. When the “times” in which one lives are as morally depraved as Nazi Germany, accomplishing God’s will could imply making the ultimate sacrifice. Essentially, German Christians had only two options: either take a stand against Hitler or make compromises against one’s conscience and one’s faith.

Bonhoeffer believed every Christian was called to take up their cross and walk the road to Calvary with Christ. He believed that in order to find God, one must go to the cross of Christ.

He wrote, "… whoever would find him must go to the foot of the Cross, as the Sermon on the Mount commands. This is not according to our nature at all, it is entirely contrary to it. But this is the message of the Bible, not only in the New but also in the Old Testament …"[4] 

In no short measure did Bonhoeffer pick up his cross and respond to God’s call. Bonhoeffer made the difficult decision to fully commit himself to combat Hitler. Already a co-conspirator in the plots to assassinate Hitler, Bonhoeffer joined an anti-Nazi resistance and became a double agent. 

Bonhoeffer’s participation in the resistance was short-lived, however. In early 1943 the Gestapo caught wind of Bonhoeffer’s plans to help Jewish refugees escape and consequently, Bonhoeffer was arrested. Fortunately, they had not yet discovered his association with those who were conspiring to assassinate Hitler. 

In an essay he wrote a few months before his arrest, he writes,

“Who stands fast? Only the man whose final standard is not his reason, his principles, his conscience, his freedom, or his virtue, but who is ready to sacrifice all this when he is called to obedient and responsible action in faith and in exclusive allegiance to God -- the responsible man, who tries to make his whole life an answer to the question and call of God.” [4]

On July 20th, 1944, the famous Valkyrie plot was executed. Unfortunately, Hitler would survive the assassination attempt unscathed, quite satisfied and amused by his luck.  A few days later, the Nazis began arresting and executing many of Bonhoeffer’s brave co-conspirators, many of whom were family members.  In October of that year, Bonheoffer was transferred to a Gestapo prison where he would remain for four months. Upon his arrival, Bonhoeffer was interrogated in regards to his knowledge of the conspiracy and the identities of his co-conspirators. Needless to say, Bonhoeffer revealed nothing.  On the 7th of February 1945, Bonhoeffer was moved again but this time to the infamous Buchenwald concentration camp where he would join a band of 15 misfit prisoners, ranging from army generals and aristocrats to a prostituted woman and a concentration camp “doctor”.

As the war was nearing an end, only a few weeks before Hitler would take his own life, Hitler demanded the execution of all the remaining conspirators. Bonhoeffer was on that list. Bonhoeffer was taken to Flossenburg and on the 8th of April, Bonhoeffer was hung. Bonhoeffer thought of death as “the last station on the road to freedom.” The Flossenburg camp doctor, who witnessed Bonhoeffer’s execution, recalled, “In the almost fifty years that I worked as a doctor, I have hardly ever seen a man die so entirely submissive to the will of God.”

Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s story serves as a well-timed “reality check” for the modern day Christian. We may not be so dissimilar from the German Christians whose complacency and lukewarm faith paved the way for Hitler’s rise to power. In 21st century America, it is rare that we are forced to make formal declarations of faith in the public sphere. Yet, what of our interior declarations of faith? Bonhoeffer made his commitment to Christ clear not merely through his role in the Confessing Church or his participation in espionage. But rather, Bonhoeffer strived to foster a commitment to Christ always and in all ways.

Almost every day I’m confronted with a news headline regarding the continued persecution of my fellow Christians around the world: Christians in China, Indonesia, Syria, and Africa. However, my responses to these stories are not entirely sympathetic but rather, more so, envious. I want what they have. Like many other Christians, I desire to glorify my God through the gift of my complete and total commitment, obedience, and faithfulness. I do not envy their suffering per se, but I desire the opportunity they are given; the opportunity to experience the faithfulness of God during times of great persecution. Those Christians, resistant to their government’s coercion and attacks, are being given the grace necessary to accomplish God’s will on earth. They are experiencing what it truly means to be a serious Christian. What it means to walk the road of Calvary with Christ, to share in His sufferings and take comfort in the reality that they have already been saved.

The excesses we are granted in the western world are at times a blessing and at other times a curse. Our material excess has the ability to numb our spiritual senses. We eventually lose sight of the central message of the Gospel and its serious claim upon our lives. Heroic tales, like that of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, read almost like fairytales rather than the timely wake-up calls they ought to be.

God is calling all Christians to heroic virtue in the here and now. But are we “ prepared to bear all losses” for the sake of the Gospel?   

_______________________________

[1] http://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/cwn/2018/september/more-chinese-pastors-sign-statement-affirming-religious-freedom-as-us-govt-holds-hearing-on-persecution

[2] Metaxas, Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy, 83.

[3] Ibid, 81.

[4] Ibid, 137.